Suraj Prakash Manchanda, Delhi V. Income tax Officer, New Delhi

CO 196/DEL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3567 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Cross Objection
• Pronouncement Date: 16-03-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 2
• Next Hearing Date: 10-08-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 17-06-2015
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B R MISHRA
• Assessee Lawyers: SURAJ PRAKASH MANCHANDA
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH SMC, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MA NO.226/DEL/2016 (IN ITA NO.7073/DEL/2014) ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 ITO, WARD- 67(3), NEW DELHI. VS. SURAJ PRAKASH MANCHANDA, H.NO.C-2/35B, KESHAV PURAM, DELHI. PAN : AAGPM5280Q (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) C.O. NO.196/DEL/2015 (IN ITA NO.7073/DEL/2014) ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 SURAJ PRAKASH MANCHANDA, H.NO.C-2/35B, KESHAV PURAM, DELHI. VS. ITO, WARD- 67(3), NEW DELHI. PAN : AAGPM5280Q (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI B. R. MISHRA, SR.DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI SURAJ PRAKASH MANCHANDA (ASSESSEE) DATE OF HEARING : 15-02-2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 16-03-2018 O R D E R PER R. K. PANDA, AM : THE REVENUE THROUGH THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION REQUESTS THE TRIBUNAL TO RECALL THE ORDER PASSED BY IT DISMISSIN G THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE. 2. LD. DR REFERRING TO THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIO N FILED BY THE REVENUE SUBMITTED THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS DISMISSED THE APPEA L FILED BY THE REVENUE ON THE 2 MA NO.226/DEL/2016 C.O. NO.196/DEL/2015 GROUND THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN THE IMPUGNED APPEAL I S BELOW THE LIMIT PRESCRIBED BY THE CBDT. FURTHER, THE ISSUE OF EXEMPTION U/S 1 0(10C) IS FOR EMPLOYEES OF THE SBI AND ASSOCIATES BANKS UNDER THE STAFF SUPERV ISING EXIT OPTION SCHEME. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE TRIBUNAL WHILE DECIDING THE A PPEAL HAS NOT CONSIDERED THE FACT THAT THE RELIEF ALLOWED BY THE LD. CIT(A) TO T HE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE CBDT INSTRUCTION DATED 06.10.2009 WHICH CLEARLY QUALIFIE S THE IMPUGNED APPEAL TO FALL UNDER THE REALM OF EXCEPTIONAL CLAUSE 8(B) OF CBDT S CIRCULAR 21/2015 DATED 10.12.2015. FURTHER, THE TRIBUNAL HAS NOT CONSIDER ED THE SUBMISSION MADE IN THE DETAILED NOTE BY THE REVENUE FILED ALONG WITH T HE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS AT THE TIME OF FILING OF APPEAL. HE ACCORDINGLY SUBMI TTED THAT THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL BE RECALLED AND FRESH ORDER BE PASSED AFTE R HEARING BOTH THE SIDES. 3. THE ASSESSEE HIMSELF APPEARED BEFORE THE TRIBUNA L AND SUBMITTED APART FROM DISMISSING THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE ON ACCOUNT OF LOW TAX EFFECT THE TRIBUNAL HAS ALSO DECIDED THE ISSUE ON MERIT BY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF S.B.I. EXI T OPTEES ASSOCIATION VS. CBDT IN WRIT PETITION NO.1718 OF 2011 ORDER DATED 1 7.08.2012 AND HELD THAT THE ISSUE IS IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, THE REVENUE THROUGH THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IS TRYING TO PERSUADE THE TRIBUNAL TO REVIEW ITS OWN ORDER WHICH IS NOT PERMISSIBLE IN LAW. HE ACCORDIN GLY SUBMITTED THAT THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE REVENUE SHOU LD BE DISMISSED. 3 MA NO.226/DEL/2016 C.O. NO.196/DEL/2015 4. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE MISCELLANEOUS APPL ICATION FILED BY THE REVENUE IS ALSO BARRED BY LIMITATION SINCE THE SAME HAS BEEN FILED AFTER TWO YEARS OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DISMISSING THE A PPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE. THEREFORE, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IS NOT MAI NTAINABLE. 5. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL ARGUMENTS MADE BY BO TH THE SIDES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. I FIND THE TRIBU NAL APART FROM DISMISSING THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE ON ACCOUNT OF LOW TAX E FFECT HAS ALSO DECIDED THE ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY FOLLOWING THE DE CISIONS OF THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF S.B.I. EXIT OPTEES ASSOCIATION (SUPRA) AND HAS HELD THAT THE ISSUE IS IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSE E. SINCE THE TRIBUNAL HAS DECIDED THE ISSUE ON MERIT ALSO, THEREFORE, RECALLI NG OF THE ORDER ON THE BASIS OF MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE REVENUE AMOU NTS TO REVIEW OF ITS OWN ORDER BY THE TRIBUNAL WHICH IS NOT PERMISSIBLE IN L AW. THEREFORE, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE REVENUE BEIN G DEVOID OF MERIT IS BEING DISMISSED. C.O. NO.196/DEL/2015 (BY ASSESSEE) : 6. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE SIDES, I FIND THE ASSESSE E IN THE CROSS OBJECTION HAS BASICALLY CHALLENGED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENU E AS BEING NOT MAINTAINABLE IN LAW AS ALSO FACTS BY RELYING ON VARIOUS DECISION S ACCORDING TO WHICH IDENTICAL ISSUE HAS BEEN DECIDED BY THE CO-ORDINATE BENCHES O F THE TRIBUNAL AND, THEREFORE, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE HAS TO B E DISMISSED. 4 MA NO.226/DEL/2016 C.O. NO.196/DEL/2015 7. I FIND THE ISSUE RELATING TO EXEMPTION U/S 10(10 C) ON ACCOUNT OF VOLUNTARILY RETIREMENT OF EMPLOYEES OF VARIOUS BANK S UNDER THE EXIST OPTION SCHEMES, 2005 HAS BEEN DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASS ESSEE BY THE COORDINATE BENCHES OF THE TRIBUNAL. THE TRIBUNAL WHILE DECIDI NG THE ISSUE HAS RELIED ON THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT AND D ISMISSED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE. SINCE I HAVE ALREADY DISMISSED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE, THEREFORE, THE CROSS OBJECTION FILED BY TH E ASSESSEE BECOMES INFRUCTUOUS. ACCORDINGLY, THE SAME IS DISMISSED. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FIL ED BY THE REVENUE AS WELL AS THE CROSS OBJECTION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DI SMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 16 TH MARCH, 2018. SD/- (R. K. PANDA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 16-03-2018. SUJEET COPY OF ORDER TO: - 1) THE APPELLANT 2) THE RESPONDENT 3) THE CIT 4) THE CIT(A) 5) THE DR, I.T.A.T., NEW DELHI BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI