Finance Ministry

Increase in threshold monetary limits for filing Appeals – CBDT/CBIC Circulars

Increase in threshold monetary limits for filing Departmental Appeals at Appellate Tribunals, High Courts and the Supreme Court

Major Steps taken for Reducing Tax Litigations 

In order to reduce the long pending grievances of taxpayers and to minimise litigations pertaining to tax matters and to facilitate the Ease of Doing Business, Government of India has decided to increase the threshold monetary limits for filing Departmental Appeals at various levels, be it Appellate Tribunals, High Courts and the Supreme Court in the following manner :-

Sl. No. Appeal Fora Present limit for filing appeal

(In Rs.)

Enhanced limit

(In Rs.)

1. ITAT / CESTAT 10 lakhs 20 lakhs
2. High Courts 20 lakhs 50 lakhs
3. Supreme Court 25 lakhs 1 Crore

 

This is a major step in the direction of litigation management of both direct and indirect taxes as it will effectively reduce minor litigations and help the Department to focus on high value litigations.

In case of CBDT, out of total cases filed by the Department in ITAT, 34% of cases will be withdrawn. In case of High Courts, 48% of cases will be withdrawn and in case of Supreme Court 54% of cases will be withdrawn. The total percentage of reduction of litigation from Department’s side will get reduced by 41%. However, this will not apply in such cases where substantial point of law is involved.

Similarly, in case of CBIC, out of total cases filed by the Department in CESTAT, 16% of cases will be withdrawn. In case of High Courts, 22% of cases will be withdrawn and in case of Supreme Court 21% of cases will be withdrawn. The total percentage of reduction of litigation from Department’s side will get reduced by 18%. However, this will not apply in such cases where substantial point of law is involved.

This step will also reduce future litigation flow from the Department side.

Source: PIB

Read CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 and CBIC Instruction dated 11th July 2018 as issued in this regard.

Share

Recent Posts

  • FCRA

FCRA specifies list of 105 purposes to be selected for which registration is applied

FCRA specifies list of purposes to be selected for which registration is applied.  The Ministry of Home Affairs has notified…

19 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Withholding tax u/s 40(a)(i) not required on cost-to-cost reimbursement made to parent company

Assessee was not liable to withhold tax at source u/s 40(a)(i) on cost-to-cost reimbursement made to parent company In a…

20 hours ago
  • Government

Temporarily blocking public access to Telegram App not disproportionate – Delhi High Court

Temporarily blocking public access to Telegram App under section 69A of IT Act 2000 is not disproportionate - Delhi HC…

4 days ago
  • Income Tax

High Court explains the meaning of term ‘enterprise’ appearing in section 80IA

High Court explains the meaning of term ‘enterprise’ appearing in section 80IA to means a project or an undertaking owned…

4 days ago
  • Income Tax

Addition deleted as assessee was only a carrier of cash not owner who came up to own it

Addition deleted as assessee was only a carrier of cash and the real owner had come forward owning the cash…

6 days ago
  • RTI

Lokayukta Police not exempt from disclosure of information under RTI Act 2005 – SC

Lokayukta Police not an ‘intelligence and security’ organisation  and hence not exempt from disclosure of information under RTI Act 2005…

1 week ago