Vishesh Gupta, New Delhi V. ACIT, New Delhi

CO 386/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3450 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Cross Objection
• Pronouncement Date: 01-09-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 04-05-2017
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 24-12-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHRAVAN GOTRU
• Assessee Lawyers: SURESH K GUPTA
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH D, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOS. 1224, 1225 & 1228/DEL/2014 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2010-11 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. SH. VISHES H GUPTA, CIRCLE-X C-3/28-29, SECTOR-15, ROOM NO. 362, ARA CENTRE, ROHINI, DELHI 85 JHANDEWALAN EXTN., NEW DELHI 110 055 (PAN:AGJPG0058P) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) AND CROSS OBJECTION NOS. 386, 387 & 390/DEL/2014 (IN ITA NOS. 1224, 1225 & 1228/DEL/2014) ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2010-11 SH. VISHESH GUPTA, VS. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX C-3/28-29, SECTOR-15, CIRCLE-X ROHINI, DELHI 85 ROOM NO. 362, ARA CENTRE, JHANDEWALAN EXTN., NEW DELHI 110 055 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) DEPARTMENT BY : SH. SHRAVAN GOTRU, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SH. SURESH K. GUPTA, CA ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, JM THE DEPARTMENT HAS FILED THESE APPEALS AND ASSESSE E HAS FILED THE CROSS OBJECTIONS WHICH ARE EMANATE FROM THE RESPECTIVE OR DERS OF THE LD. CIT(A)-XXXII, NEW DELHI PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEARS 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2010-11. SINCE THE GROUNDS ARE SIMILAR, HENCE, THE APPEALS WERE HEAR D TOGETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY 2 THIS COMMON ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, BY O NLY REPRODUCING THE GROUNDS RAISED IN REVENUES APPEAL 1224/DEL/2014 (AY 2006-07) WHIC H READS AS UNDER:- 1. THAT THE CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS OF T HE CASE IN REDUCING THE COMMISSION INCOME EARNED BY PROVIDING ACCOMMODATIO N ENTRIES TO 2% FROM 5.6% ON THE TOTAL TURNOVER TAKEN BY THE AO. 2.(A) THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IS ERRONEOUS AND NOT TENABLE IN LAW AND ON FACTS. (B) THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER OR AME ND ANY / ALL OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE OR DURING THE COURSE OF THE HEARIN G OF THE APPEAL. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSE SSEE HAS FILED TAX EFFECT CALCULATION CHART AND STATED THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN ALL THE THREE REVENUE APPEALS IS LESS THAN THE PRESCRIBED LIMIT OF RS. 10 LACS AS FI XED BY THE CBDT. THEREFORE, HE REQUESTED THAT THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE MAY BE DI SMISSED ON THIS ACCOUNT. 3. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. DR DID NOT CONTROVERT THE CONTENTION RAISED BY THE LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE, BUT HE RELIED UPON THE ORD ER OF THE AO. 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RECORDS. WE FIND CONSIDERABLE COGENCY IN THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. COUNSEL OF TH E ASSESSEE THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN THE REVENUES APPEAL IS BELOW THE LIMIT OF RS. 10 LACS, AS FIXED BY THE CBDT AND, THEREFORE, THE DEPARTMENTS APPEAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE, IN V IEW OF THE CIRCULAR NO. 21/2015 DATED 10 TH DECEMBER, 2015 ISSUED VIDE F.NO. 279/MISC. 142/200 7-ITJ (PT.) BY THE CBDT. FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, THE RELEVANT PARA NOS. 3 & 10 OF THE AFORESAID CBDTS CIRCULAR ARE REPRODUCED AS UNDER:- 3. HENCEFORTH, APPEALS/ SLPS SHALL NOT BE FILED IN CASES WHERE THE TAX EFFECT DOES NOT EXCEED THE MONETARY LIMITS GIVEN HE REUNDER: S NO APPEALS IN INCOME -TAX MATTERS MONETARY LIMIT (IN RS) 1 BEFORE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 10,00,000/- 2 BEFORE HIGH COURT 20,00,000/ - 3 3 BEFORE SUPREME COURT 25,00,000/- IT IS CLARIFIED THAT AN APPEAL SHOULD NOT BE FILED MERELY BECAUSE THE TAX EFFECT IN A CASE EXCEEDS THE MONETARY LIMITS PRESCR IBED ABOVE. FILING OF APPEAL IN SUCH CASES IS TO BE DECIDED ON MERITS OF THE CASE. 10. THIS INSTRUCTION WILL APPLY RETROSPECTIVELY TO PENDING APPEALS AND APPEALS TO BE FILED HENCEFORTH IN HIGH COURTS/ TRIB UNALS. PENDING APPEALS BELOW THE SPECIFIED TAX LIMITS IN PARA 3 AB OVE MAY BE WITHDRAWN/ NOT PRESSED. APPEALS BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT WILL BE GOVERNED BY THE INSTRUCTIONS ON THIS SUBJECT, OPERA TIVE AT THE TIME WHEN SUCH APPEAL WAS FILED. 5. IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE THAT THE BOARDS INSTRUCTIO N OR DIRECTIONS ISSUED TO THE INCOME- TAX AUTHORITIES ARE BINDING ON THOSE AUTHORITIES, T HEREFORE, THE DEPARTMENT SHOULD HAVE WITHDRAWN/ NOT PRESSED THE PRESENT APPEAL, IN VIEW OF THE AFORESAID INSTRUCTIONS SINCE THE TAX EFFECT IN THE INSTANT APPEALS ARE LESS THAN THE AMOUNT OF RS. 10 LACS, PRESCRIBED IN THE ABOVE SAID CBDTS INSTRUCTIONS. 6. KEEPING IN VIEW THE CBDT INSTRUCTION NO. 21/2015 DATED 10 TH DECEMBER, 2015, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE REVENUE SHOULD HAVE WIT HDRAWN/ NOT PRESSED THE INSTANT APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. WE ARE ALSO OF THE VIE W THAT THE SAID INSTRUCTIONS ARE APPLICABLE FOR THE PENDING APPEALS AND APPEALS TO B E FILED HENCEFORTH IN TRIBUNAL. ACCORDINGLY, ALL THE REVENUE APPEALS ARE DISMISSED. ASSESSEES CROSS OBJECTIONS 7. AS FAR AS ASSESSEES CROSS OBJECTIONS ARE CONCER NED, SINCE WE HAVE DISMISSED THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE ON ACCOUNT OF LOW TAX EFFECT , AS AFORESAID, HENCE, THE CROSS OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE HAVE BECOME INFRUC TUOUS AND DISMISSED AS SUCH. 4 8. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE 03 REVENUE APPEALS AS WEL L AS 03 ASSESSEES CROSS OBJECTIONS STAND DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 01/09/2017. SD/- SD/- (PRASHANT MAHARISHI) (H.S. SIDHU) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 01/09/2017 *SR BHATNAGAR* COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR