COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. GULSHAN ELECTRIC STORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The main appeal filed by the revenue was rejected only on the ground that the appeal was not maintainable since tax effect was less than Rs. 2 lacs and as such the appeal was not required to be filed in view of the circular issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes dated 27th March, 2000 referred to in our Judgment.

(2.) Alongwith the review petition, the revenue has filed instructions dated 24th October, 2005 which would have been applicable in the present case since the appeal was filed after these instructions were issued. Even these instructions lay down that normally an appeal under Sec. 260A should not be filed if the tax effect is upto Rs. 4,00,000/ -. No doubt, clause -3 of the instructions states that where a case involves a substantial question of law of importance or where the same question of law is involved in a number of cases then the appeal may be filed on merits without being hindered by the monetary limits. This clause envisages application of mind by the authority that despite the effect being not within the monetary limits due to compelling reasons spelt out in this clause the revenue feels that it is necessary to have a judgment of the High Court. No doubt, if such important question is identified and the revenue makes out a case that it had taken a conscious decision to file an appeal, the appeal can be entertained.

(3.) However, in the present case there was no such averment in the ground of appeal that any such conscious decision had been taken. However, we may clarify that we have disposed of the appeal only on the ground of maintainability and have not touched the merits of the contentions and our decision shall not be treated as res judicata in any other proceedings.