AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Honourable Mr. Justice Akil Kureshi
Revenue has preferred this appeal against the judgment of the Tribunal 12.10.2007. At the time of admission of appeal, following questions were framed for our consideration :
(A) Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in rejecting the Misc. Application filed by the Revenue contending that the additions were made in pursuance to revenue''s audit objection for which there is an exception in the Board''s instructions ?
(B) Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in not rendering its decision on merits solely on the ground of low tax effect?
Issue is short. Revenue''s contention is that despite monetary limits set out by the CBDT in its variouscirculars issued from time to time for preferring appeals to the Appellate Tribunal and further appeals, such circulars also provided for exceptions where despite the stakes being lower than the limit set out by the Board, appeal could be filed. In the present case, it is the case of the Revenue that the issue was one in which audit objection was received and that therefore, by virtue of one of the exceptions to the general directives of not preferring the appeal in small claims, the appeal should have been entertained by the Tribunal. Contention of the Revenue is that the limitation of filing appeals must be read into the Board''s circular subject to the conditions of exceptions laid down therein.
On the other hand, counsel for the assessee submitted that in any case, the amount involved is only Rs.75,000/-. Further, the fact that issue was one involving audit objection was never brought on record before the Tribunal either in the original proceedings or in the rectification application filed.
Though we are broadly in agreement with the counsel for the Revenue that wherever monetary limits are provided in the CBDT circulars for preferring appeals by the Revenue, such limitations must be examined subject to the conditions and exceptions laid in such circulars. However, in the present case, the amount involved is quite small. The appeal is an old one. We would not like to reopen the issue at this distant point of time particularly looking to the amount involved. Therefore, without deciding the question of law present before this Court, this appeal is disposed of.