IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH: CHENNAI (BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.2876/Chny/2017 Assessment Year: 2000-01 Deputy Commissioner of Vs. M/s.Indonet Global Ltd., Income Tax, 114,Kothari Building, Corporate Circle-2(2), 4th floor,Mahatma Gandhi Rd Wanaparthy Block,Chennai-34. Nungambakkam,Chennai-6. [PAN: AAACI6476K] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Mr.M.S.Nethrapal,JCIT,D.R Respondent by Mr.A.Arjunraj,C.A Date of Hearing 21.08.2019 Date of Pronouncement 21.08.2019 ORDER PER GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This is appeal filed by Revenue against Order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Chennai, in ITA No.36/C.I.T(A)-6/2007-08 dated 20.09.2017 for assessment year 2000-01. 2. Mr.M.S.Nethrapal represented on behalf of Revenue and Mr.A.Arjunraj represented on behalf of assessee. ITA No.2876/Chny/2017. appeal filed by Revenue is delayed by three days. Revenue has not filed Affidavit in its proper form. Revenue had been asked to file affidavit in Stamp Paper, but affidavit has been filed by Shri R.Bhoopathi, Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Range-2(2), Chennai-34 on plain paper. 4. Affidavit is declaration of facts made in writing and sworn before person having authority to administer oath. All Affidavits are verified statements and printed on Stamp Papers of different denominations. According to Indian Laws, Affidavit can be used to prove fact in court of law provided Court orders it. 4.1 Further, Rule-10 of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963 provides for filing of Affidavits wherein it is specifically mentioned that: Where fact which cannot be borne out by, or is contrary to, record is alleged, it shall be stated clearly and concisely and supported by duly sworn affidavit. 4.2 Moreover, since affidavits are not included in definition of Evidence in Indian Evidence Act, they can be used as evidence only when court finds it reasonable to invoke provisions of order-19 of Civil Procedure Code. This provision is however, subject to right of opposite party to produce deponent for cross verification. ITA No.2876/Chny/2017 :- 3 -: 4.3 Furthermore, Affidavit on Stamp Papers are on Non Judicial Stamp Paper , which are ADMINISTERED on oath before Notary appointed by State Government, and stamp duty are paid as per Stamp Act. second category of affidavits, which are ADMINISTERED on oath before oath Commissioner, who are appointed by High Court, and it is written on plain paper and stamp duty are exempted by Stamp Act, and if duty is imposed for stamp duty in Affidavits to be used in court in judicial functions adhesive court fees are paid. 5. In present case, affidavit filed by Shri R.Bhoopathi is on plain paper neither Notarized, nor ADMINISTERED on oath, nor necessary adhesive court fees are paid. This being so, affidavit filed is neither affidavit for purpose of condoning delay nor is affidavit as per requirements for purpose under Rule-10 of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963. Effectively what has been done is that under guise of affidavit, Officer has only filed letter seeking condonation of delay, which is not permissible under any of provisions of law, nor Rule-10 of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963. Consequently, appeal filed by Revenue stands dismissed for defects uncured by applying principles laid down by Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court in case of Prasad Productions P. Ltd. Vs. Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal [1997] 226 ITR 778 (Mad). ITA No.2876/Chny/2017 :- 4 -: 6. Before us, learned Counsel for Revenue and Assessee fairly conceded that tax effect involved in this appeal does not exceed Rs.50 /- lakhs. 7. Vide CBDT circular No.17/2019 in F.No.279/Misc.142/2007-ITJ(Pt) dated 8th August, 2019, income tax department has further liberalized its policy for not filing appeals against decisions of appellate authorities in favour of taxpayers, wherein tax involved is below certain threshold limits, and announced its policy decision not to file, or press, appeals, before this Tribunal, against appellate orders favourable to assessee in cases in which overall tax effect, excluding interest except when interest itself is in dispute, is Rs 50 /- lakhs or less. 8. In view of above factual background and concession by this CBDT circular, this appeal filed by Revenue must be dismissed as withdrawn. 9. This circular, only enhances monetary limits and gives further relaxation. old circular, beyond any dispute or controversy, categorically applied to pending appeals as on date of issuance of circular. ITA No.2876/Chny/2017 :- 5 -: 10. circular dated 8th August 2019 is not standalone circular. It is to be read in conjunction with CBDT circular No. 3/2018 (and subsequent amendment thereto), and all it does is to replace paragraph nos. 3 and 5 of said circular. This is evident from following extracts from circular dated 8th August 2019: 2. As step towards further management of litigation. it has been decided by Board that monetary limits for filing of appeals in income-tax cases be enhanced further through amendment in Para 3 of Circular mentioned above and accordingly, table for monetary limits specified in Para 3 of Circular shall read as follows: Sl. Appeals/SLPs in Income-tax Monetary No matters Limit (Rs.) 1 Before Appellate Tribunal 50,00,000 2 Before High Court 1,00,00,000 3 Before Supreme Court 2,00,00,000 3. Further, with view to provide parity in filing of appeals in scenarios where separate order is passed by higher appellate authorities for each assessment year vis-a-vis where composite order for more than one assessment years is passed. para 5 of circular is substituted by following para: 5. Assessing Officer shall calculate tax effect separately for every assessment year in respect of disputed issues in case of everyassessee. If in case of assessee, disputed issues arise in more than one assessment year, appeal can be filed in respect of such assessment year or years in which tax effect in respect of disputed issues exceeds monetary limit specified in para 3. No appeal shall be filed in respect of assessment year or years in which tax effect is less than monetary limit specified in para-3. Further, even in case of composite order of any High Court or appellate authority which involves more than one assessment year and common issues in more than one assessment year no appeal shall be filed in respect of assessment year or years in which tax effect is less than monetary limit specified in para 3. In case where composite order/ judgement involves more than one assessee, each assessee shall be dealt with separately 4. said modifications shall come into effect from date of issue of this Circular. ITA No.2876/Chny/2017 :- 6 -: 11. Clearly, all other portions of circular no. 3 of 2018 (supra) have remained intact. portion which has remained intact includes paragraph 13 of aforesaid circular which is as follows: 13. This Circular will apply to SLPs/ appeals/ cross objections/ references to be filed henceforth in SC/HCs/Tribunal and it shall also apply retrospectively to pending SLPs/ appeals/ cross objections/references. Pending appeals below specified tax limits in pare 3 above may be withdrawn/ not pressed. 12. Hon ble Supreme Court in case of Commissioner of Income Tax-5,New Delhi Vs. Keshav Power Ltd., in SLP No.21497/2019 dated 16.08.2019 reported in 2019(8)TMI 811(SC) has also applied Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 has dismissed appeal holding as follows: Since tax effect involved in matter is less than Rs.2/- crores, going by latest circular issued by CBDT, we see no reason to interfere in this matter. Special Leave Petition is dismissed, leaving all questions of law open . 13. Learned Commissioner (DR) submits liberty may kindly be given to point out, upon necessary further verifications, and to seek recall dismissal of appeal and restoration of appeal in case (i) in which it can be demonstrated that appeals are covered by exceptions, and (ii) which are inadvertently included in this bunch of appeals, wherein tax effect, in terms of CBDT circular (supra), exceeds Rs 50,00,000. None opposes this prayer; we accept same. We make it clear that appellants shall be at liberty to point out case which is wrongly included in appeal so summarily dismissed, either owing to wrong computation of tax effect or owning to such cases being covered by ITA No.2876/Chny/2017 :- 7 -: permissible exceptions- or for any other reason, and we will take appropriate remedial steps in this regard. 14. In circumstances, respectfully following principles laid down by Hon ble Supreme Court in case of Commissioner of Income Tax-5,New Delhi Vs. Keshav Power Ltd., referred to supra and in light of above discussions, appeal filed by Revenue is found to be non-maintainable. 15. In circumstances, on both grounds discussed above, appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed. 16. In result, appeal filed by Revenue stands dismissed as defects uncured, and also as non-maintainable as per CBDT circular No.17/2019 dated 8th August, 2019. Order pronounced in open Court after conclusion of hearing on 21st August, 2019 in Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (INTURI RAMA RAO) (GEORGE MATHAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, 4 Dated 21st August, 2019. K S Sundaram Copy to 1.Appellant 4. CIT 2. Respondent 5. DR 3. CIT(A) 6.GF Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Corporate Circle-2(2), Chennai v. Indonet Global Ltd