HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Commissioner of Income-tax
versus
Ramkishore Nandkishore
M.A.I.T. Nos. 18 & 22 OF 2005
FEBRUARY 12, 2013
JUDGMENT
1. Shri Sanjay Lal, Counsel for the appellant.
1.1 Shri Sandesh Jain, Counsel for respondent.
1.2 These appeals are listed for final hearing.
1.3 In M.A.I.T. 18 of 2005 following substantial questions of law were framed on 6.5.2005 :-
1. “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Hon. ITAT was justified in law in deleting the levy of penalty u/s 27(1)(a) on the grounds that returns filed on these years were accepted even though it was beyond the limit prescribed under Section 139 (1) ?
2. Whether the Tribunal could allow the appeal without assigning any reason by mere recording the submissions of the appellant and respondent ?
1.4 In M.A.I.T.22 of 2005, following substantial questions of law were framed for consideration:-
1. “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Hon. ITAT was justified in law in deleting the levy of penalty u/s 27(1)(a) on the grounds that returns filed on these years were accepted even though it was beyond the limit prescribed under Section 139 (1) ?
2. Whether the Tribunal could allow the appeal without assigning any reason by mere recording the submissions of the appellant and respondent ?
2. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that in M.A.I.T. No. 18 of 2005, tax impact is Rs. 43,000/- while in M.A.I.T. No. 22 of 2005, tax impact is Rs. 15,360/- and as per the Board instruction 1997 dated 27.3.2000 the Board had issued instructions that the appeals will be filed only in cases where the tax effect exceeds the monitory limit beyond Rs.2 lakh in the High Court U/s 260-A or reference U/s256 (2) of the Income Tax Act.
3. Stating aforesaid, it was submitted by Shri Jain that in these appeals, tax affect is less than Rs.2 lakh and may be dismissed only on this ground. He has relied on the two Division Bench judgments of this Court in CIT v. Suresh Chand Goyal [2008] 298 ITR 277 and CIT v. Ashok Kumar Manibhai Patel & Co. [2009] 317 ITR 386 (MP) in support of his contention.
4. Shri Lal learned counsel appearing for the appellant though opposed the aforesaid prayer but could not refute the contention of the appellant that by the Board instructions No.1979 dated 27.3.2000, the Board had specifically directed that the Department shall file appeal only in cases where tax effect exceeds monetary limits of Rs.2 lakh in the matter of High Court.
The instructions issued by this Board reads thus :-
Monetary limits for filing Departmental appeals/references before Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, High Courts and Supreme Court-Measures for reducing litigation
Reference is invited to the Board’s Instruction No. 1903, dated 28th October, 1992, (See Clarification Five) and Instruction No. 1777, dated 4th November 1987, (See Clarification Five) wherein monetary limits of Rs. 25,000 for Departmental appeals (in income-tax matters) before the Appellate Tribunal, Rs. 50,000 for filing reference to the High Court and Rs. 1,50,000 for filing appeal to the Supreme Court were laid down.
2. In supersession of the above instruction, it has now been decided by the Board that appeals will be filed only in cases where the tax effect exceeds the revised monetary limits given hereunder:
