DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, Jaipur V. SHRI ABDUL LATIF, Jaipur

ITA 10/JPR/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6388 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-07-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 02-01-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: J C KULHARI
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Capital asset; Depreciation; Cost of acquisition; Tax effect
• Section: 2(14); 68

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHE S, JAIPUR JH FOT; IKY JKO] U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH FOE FLAG ;KNO] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI VIJY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA. NO. 10/JP/2018 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2012-13 THE DCIT, CIRCLE-07, JAIPUR CUKE VS. SH. ABDUL LATIF, NEAR TEMPO STAND, MOHALLA KAGZJIYO, SANGANER, JAIPUR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: AAXPL1245R VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ C.O. NO. 03/JP/2018 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 10/JP/2018) FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2012-13 SH. ABDUL LATIF, NEAR TEMPO STAND, MOHALLA KAGZJIYO, SANGANER, JAIPUR CUKE VS. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-07, JAIPUR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: AAXPL1245R VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT JKTLO DH VKSJ LS @ REVENUE BY : SHRI J. C. KULHARI (JCIT) FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ L S@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI P. C. PARWAL (C.A.) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF HEARING : 12/07/2018 MN?KKS'K.KK DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 16/07/2018 VKNS'K@ ORDER ITA NO. 10/JP/2018 CO. NO. 03 /JP/2018 DCIT, JAIPUR VS. SH. ABDUL LATIF, JAIPUR 2 PER: VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AND THE CRO SS OBJECTION BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A)-3, JAI PUR DATED 24.10.2017 FOR AY 2012-13. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE A ND THE ASSESSEE ARE AS UNDER:- ITA NO. 10/JP/2018 (GROUNDS OF REVENUES APPEAL): 1) ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E, THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN APPLYING THE GP RATE @ 23.50% A GAINST 23.90% APPLIED BY THE AO INVOKING THE PROVISION OF SECTION 145(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 2) ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E, THE CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING THE TRADING ADDITION OF RS . 6,38,210/- AND CONFIRMING THE PART ADDITION OF RS. 8,30,716/- LOOK ING THE INCREASED TURNOVER OF THE ASSESSEE IN PAST TWO YEAR S. 3) THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 50,00,000/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CREDITS U/S 68 OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 CONSIDERING THE SOLD LAND AS AGRICUL TURE AND NOT A CAPITAL ASSET U/S 2(14) AND AS PER THE PROVISIONS O F SECTION 51, THE ADVANCE MONEY FORFEITED IS TO BE REDUCED FROM T HE COST OF ACQUISITION. CO NO. 03//JP/2018 (GROUNDS OF ASSESSEES APPEAL):- I) THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL S) HAS ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN CONFIRMING THE REJECTI ON OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS BY APPLYING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 145( 3) OF THE ACT. (II) THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL S) HAS ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN CONFIRMING THE TRADING ADDITION OF RS. ITA NO. 10/JP/2018 CO. NO. 03 /JP/2018 DCIT, JAIPUR VS. SH. ABDUL LATIF, JAIPUR 3 8,30,716/- BY APPLYING G.P. RATE OF 23.50% AS AGAIN ST THE G.P. RATE OF 22.93% DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE. (III) THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEA LS) HAS ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLO WANCE OUT OF THE FOLLOWING EXPENSES:- TELEPHONE EXPENSES RS. 54,201/- TRAVELLING EXPENSES RS. 1,74,398/- VEHICLE RUNNING & MAINTENANCE EXPENSES, RS. 1,65,98 0/- PETROL EXPENSES & DEPRECIATION OFFICE EXPENSES RS. 22,140/- 2. AT THE OUTSET, LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT IN LIGHT OF THE RECENT CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 3/2018 DATED 11 JULY, 2018, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS NOT MAINTANABLE AS THE TAX EFFECT INVOLV ED IN THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE DOES NOT EXCEED THE MONETARY THRESHOLD OF RS. 20,000,00/-. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT WISHES TO PRESS THE GROUNDS RAISED IN HIS CROSS OBJ ECTION AND SAME MAY BE TREATED AS WITHDRAWN. 3. THE DR IS HEARD WHO HAS FAIRLY SUBMITTED THAT TH E TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN THE REVENUES APPEAL IS LESS THAN 20,00 0,00/- WHICH IS PRESCRIBED THRESHOLD LIMIT IN TERMS OF THE CBDT CIR CULAR NO. 3/2018 DATED 11 TH JULY, 2018 ISSUED IN SUPERSESSION OF ITS EARLIER C IRCULAR NO. 21 OF 2015 DATED 10.12.2015. 4. IN ITS LATEST CBDT CIRCULAR CIRCULAR NO. 3/2018 DATED 11 TH JULY, 2018, IT HAS BEEN STATED THAT THE APPEALS MAY BE FI LED ON MERITS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL KEEP IN VIEW THE MONETARY LIMIT AND TH E CONDITION SPECIFIED BELOW. THE MONETARY LIMIT PRESCRIBED FOR FILING APP EALS BEFORE THE ITA NO. 10/JP/2018 CO. NO. 03 /JP/2018 DCIT, JAIPUR VS. SH. ABDUL LATIF, JAIPUR 4 TRIBUNAL HAS BEEN SPECIFIED AT RS. 20,00,000/-. IT HAS BEEN CLARIFIED THE TAX EFFECT SHALL INCLUDE THE APPLICABLE SURCHARGE A ND CESS. IN PARA NO. 13, IT HAS BEEN FURTHER STATED THAT THE SAID CIRCUL AR SHALL ALSO APPLY RETROSPECTIVELY TO PENDING APPEALS AND THE PENDING APPEALS BELOW THE SPECIFIED TAX LIMITS IN PARA 3 ABOVE MAY BE WITHDRA WN/NOT PRESSED. 5. IN THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE, TAX EFFECT IN REVENUES APPEAL HAS BEEN STATED TO BE RS 17.3 LAKHS ON ADDITIONS OF RS 56.38 LAKHS WHICH IS BELOW THE PRESCRIBED THRESHOLD OF RS 20 LA CS. IN LIGHT OF THE CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 3/2018 DATED 11 TH JULY, 2018, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS HEREBY DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED. FURTHER , THE CROSS OBJECTION RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED AS NO T PRESSED. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AND THE CROSS OBJECTION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 16/07/2018. SD/- SD/- FOT; IKY JKO FOE FLAG ;KNO (VIJAY PAL RAO) (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 16/07/2018. * GANESH KR. VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- THE DCIT, CIRCLE-07, JAIPUR 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- SH. ABDUL LATIF, JAIPUR 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT(A) ITA NO. 10/JP/2018 CO. NO. 03 /JP/2018 DCIT, JAIPUR VS. SH. ABDUL LATIF, JAIPUR 5 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR. 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE { ITA NO. 10/JP/2018, CO. NO. 03 /JP/2018} VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASST. REGISTRAR