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In case of CBDT, out of total cases filed by the Department in ITAT, 34% of cases will be withdrawn. In case of High Courts, 48% of cases will be withdrawn and in case of Supreme Court 54% of cases will be withdrawn.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Similarly, in case of CBIC, out of total cases filed by the Department in CESTAT, 16% of cases will be withdrawn. In case of High Courts, 22% of cases will be withdrawn and in case of Supreme Court 21% of cases will be withdrawn.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

  • Income Tax

PCIT cannot invoke the revisionary jurisdiction u/s 263 on instance of Assessing Officer

PCIT cannot invoke the revisionary jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act upon a proposal from the Assessing Officer…

1 day ago
  • Income Tax

AO can’t disturb income returned by assessee, without issue of notice u/s 143(2) – ITAT

If AO intends to disturb income returned by assessee, it is mandatory on his part to issue notice under section…

1 day ago
  • Income Tax

Source of cash being sales proceeds of household items upon sale of flat is plausible

Source of cash deposit being sales proceeds of household items upon sale of flat was held plausible and addition u/s…

1 day ago
  • Income Tax

CPC was not justified in making the disallowance u/s 40a(ia) for non deduction of TDS

TDS deductibility being debatable issue and not an apparent incorrect claim, CPC was not justified in making the disallowance In…

2 days ago
  • Income Tax

No addition when cash deposited in bank was available as cash in hand in the books

No addition when cash deposited in bank was out of cash in hand available with the assessee and AO could…

2 days ago
  • arbitration

Use of word “can” in arbitration clause not a binding arbitration agreement –SC

Use of word “can” in arbitration clause cannot be said to be a binding arbitration agreement –Supreme Court In a…

2 days ago