The ITO, Ward-11(2), Ahmedabad V. Satishkumar Ramswroop Sharma, Ahmedabad

ITA 116/AHD/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 94495 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-09-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 29-09-2015
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 10-01-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Business income; Tax effect
• Section: 40A(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD SMC BENC H (BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA NO: 116/AHD/2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07) THE I.T.O., WARD-11(2), AHMEDABAD V/S SATISKUMAR RAMSWAROOP SHARMA 10, AAROHI VILLA, S.P. RING ROAD, BOPAL, AHMEDABAD-380058 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN: ACWPS4487R APPELLANT BY : SHRI SOMOGYAN PAL, SR. D. R. RESPONDENT BY : NONE (WRITTEN SUBMISSION) ( )/ ORDER DATE OF HEARING : 29-09-2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30-09-2015 PER ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER 1. THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS AGAINST THE ORD ER OF CIT(A)-XVI, AHMEDABAD DATED 29.10.2012 FOR A.Y. 2006-07. ITA NO. 116/ AHD/2013 . A.Y. 2006-07 2 2. IN THIS CASE, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE N OR ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION WAS FILED BUT HOWEVER WRITTEN SUBMISSIO NS WERE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. WE THEREFORE PROCEED TO DECIDE THE APPEAL , EX PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL ON RECORD AND WRI TTEN SUBMISSIONS. 3. THE RELEVANT FACTS AS CULLED OUT FROM THE MATERIAL ON RECORD ARE AS UNDER. 4. ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL STATED TO BE HAVING INCOM E FROM HOUSE PROPERTY, BUSINESS INCOME AND OTHER SOURCES. ASSESSEE FILED H IS RETURN OF INCOME FOR A.Y. 2006-07 ON 31.07.2006 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME O F RS. 28,800/-. THE SAME WAS INITIALLY PROCESSED U/S. 143(1) OF THE ACT . SUBSEQUENTLY THE CASE WAS REOPENED AND THE ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED U/S. 143 (3) R.W.S. 147 ORDER DATED 03.08.2011 AND THE TOTAL INCOME WAS DETERMINE D AT RS. 2,17,448/-. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF A.O., ASSESSEE CARRIED TH E MATTER BEFORE LD. CIT(A) WHO VIDE ORDER DATED 29.10.2012 GRANTED PART IAL RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE. AGGRIEVED BY THE AFORESAID ORDER OF LD. C IT(A), REVENUE IS NOW IN APPEAL BEFORE US AND HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUN DS:- 1. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN PAR TLY DELETING THE ADDITION OF 88,648/- OUT OF TOTAL ADDITION MADE OF RS. 1,88,64 8/- U/S. 40A(3) OF THE ACT WITHOUT ASSIGNING ANY REASONS FOR RESTRICTING THE AMOUNT OF ADDITION. 2. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE HELD THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 3. IT IS THEREFORE PRAYED THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD. CI T(A) MAY BE SET ASIDE AND THAT OF THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER BE RESTORED TO THE A BOVE EXTENT. ITA NO. 116/ AHD/2013 . A.Y. 2006-07 3 5. AT THE OUTSET, WE FIND THAT THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE REVENUE ON 10.01.2013 AND ACCORDINGLY THE MONETARY LIMIT FO R FILING APPEALS FIXED BY CBDT VIDE INSTRUCTION DATED 09-02-2011 WOULD BE APP LICABLE IN THE PRESENT CASE. ON PERUSAL OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL, IT IS SE EN THAT THE EFFECTIVE SOLITARY GROUND OF REVENUE IS THE DELETION OF ADDITION OF RS . 88,648/- BY LD. CIT(A) U/S. 40A(3) OF THE ACT AND THE TAX EFFECT OF THE DI SPUTED ADDITION WOULD BE BELOW THE MONETARY LIMIT OF TAX OF RS. 3 LACS STIPU LATED BY CBDT IN THE AFORESAID INSTRUCTIONS. BEFORE US, LD. D.R. HAS ALS O NOT PLACED ANY MATERIAL ON RECORD TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THE ISSUE IN THE PRES ENT CASE IS COVERED BY THE EXEMPTION SPECIFIED IN CLAUSE (8) OF THE AFORESAID CBDT INSTRUCTION AND THUS THE REVENUE HAS NOT MADE OUT A CASE SO AS TO DEMONS TRATE THAT THE INSTRUCTIONS OF THE CIRCULAR FOR NOT FILING THE APP EAL BASED ON MONETARY LIMITS WOULD BE APPLICABLE IN THE PRESENT CASE. IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCE, WITHOUT EXPRESSING ANY OPINION ON MERITS OF THE CASE, WE AR E OF THE VIEW THAT THE PRESENT APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS NOT MAINTAIN ABLE AND ACCORDINGLY DISMISS THE SAME ONLY ON THE BASIS OF CBDT INSTRUCT IONS REFERRED TO HEREINABOVE. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 30 - 09 - 2015. SD/- SD/- (RAJPAL YADAV) (ANIL CHATURVEDI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD: TRUE COPY RAJESH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT (APPEALS) ITA NO. 116/ AHD/2013 . A.Y. 2006-07 4 4. THE CIT CONCERNED. 5. THE DR., ITAT, AHMEDABAD. 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER DEPUTY/ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT, AHMEDABAD