N.P. Gupta, J. - (1.) THIS appeal is filed by the revenue against the judgment dated 4 -11 -2004 upholding the order of the learned Commissioner (Appeals).
(2.) THE appeal was admitted on 10 -5 -2006 by framing the following substantial question of law: (i) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in dismissing the appeal only on the ground that as per the circular of Central Board of Direct Taxes department may not file any appeal if the tax effect in the appeal is less than Rs. 1 lakh ? Arguing the appeal, learned Counsel for the appellant revenue relied upon judgment of this Court in case of CIT v. , which in turn has considered the earlier judgment of Hon;ble the Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. : [1997]228ITR463(SC) , and had also considered still other judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Tamil Nadu Industrial Investment Corporation Ltd. v. : [1999]237ITR889(SC) .
(3.) BY relying on the aforesaid two judgments in Rajasthan Patrika Ltd.'s case (supra) and Hero Cycles (P) Ltd.'s case (supra), it is sought to be contended that the circulars are mere administrative instructions, and where in spite of these administrative instructions, if the department prefers to file an appeal, or make a reference to the High Court, the appeal or the reference should not be dismissed, while according to learned Counsel, learned Tribunal has dismissed the appeal substantially on that count, though purportedly has written one sentence about having examined the issue on merits also. Then it is contended that the impugned order is liable to be set aside.;