High Court Of Punjab & Haryana
CIT vs. Varindra Construction Co.
Section 260A
Adarsh Kumar Goel & Ajay Kumar Mittal, JJ.
IT Appeal No. 209 of 2003
5th October, 2010
Counsel Appeared :
Dinesh Goyal, for the Appellant : Ravish Sood, for the Respondent
JUDGMENT
By the court :
When this appeal was taken up, learned counsel for the assessee raised a preliminary objection relying on a judgment of this Court in CIT vs. Abhinash Gupta (2010) 41 DTR (P&H) 129. He submitted that the tax effect involved in the appeal was below the limit prescribed for filing of appeal by circular issued in the year 2008.
Learned counsel for the Revenue submitted that the circular issued in the year 2008 did not have retrospective effect and did not control the appeal already filed which had to be decided according to the policy at the time the appeal was filed.
In the judgment relied upon on behalf of the assessee, after referring to the judgment of the Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Madhukar K. Inamdar (HUF) (2010) 229 CTR (Bom) 77 : (2009) 27 DTR (Bom) 132 : (2009) 318 ITR 149 (Bom), it was observed that though the circular was not retrospective, it applied to pending appeals.
We are prima facie of the view that the circular about filing of appeals cannot apply to appeals already filed prior to the date of the circular. In our opinion, the view already taken in the judgment relied upon by learned counsel for the assessee may require consideration by a larger Bench.
Let the matter be placed before Hon’ble the Chief Justice for constituting a larger Bench.
[Citation : 328 ITR 446]
