Instruction for filing of appeal and for pending appeals u/s. 268A - CBDT

Monetary limits for filing revenues appeals as per the latest instructions u/s 268A shall apply not only to prospective appeals but also to pending appeals. Monetary limits for filing revenues appeals as per the latest instructions shall apply to pending appeals unless the exception indicated in the instructions exists at the time of hearing the appeal.

Instruction 3/2011 of CBDT issued u/s 268A is defective as it only partly complies with National Litigation Policy.

Monetary limits for filing revenues appeals as per the latest instructions u/s 268A shall apply not only to prospective appeals but also to pending appeals.

Monetary limits for filing revenue appeals as per the latest instructions shall apply to pending appeals unless the exception indicated in the instructions exists at the time of hearing the appeal.

If the exception indicated in the instructions exists at the time of hearing the appeal, the same would be decided on merits otherwise the appeal would be dismissed on the ground of monetary limits. By doing so, the instruction would be saved from the vice of discrimination.

The object and intention and the surrounding circumstances of the National Litigation Policy introduced by the Central Government has to be kept in mind.

The underlying purpose was to reduce pending government litigation in Courts from 15 years to 3 years so that the valuable court time could be saved for several contentious issues.

Pending cases were required to be reviewed and frivolous and vexatious matters was required to be filtered out from the meritorious ones.

Unfortunately, the instructions issued by CBDT only partially satisfied the requirement in respect of future litigation but did not take into consideration reviewing the pending cases.

There is a defect in the instructions issued by the CBDT. The only measure taken in reducing the litigation was to raise the monetary limit.

No effort was made to review the pending cases. If the instructions had been made applicable to pending cases as laid down by the National Litigation Policy, the object of the policy would have been fulfilled.