The ITO, Ward-7(2)(3), Ahmedabad V. M/s. Lasheeka Infrastructure, Ahmedabad

ITA 1200/AHD/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 122 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5343 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 4 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-10-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 09-05-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: T SANKAR
• Assessee Lawyers: M K PATEL
• Keywords: Audit objection; Tax effect

Judgement Text

SMC-ITA NO. 1200/AHD/2016 ITO VS. LASHEEKA INFRASTRUCTURE AY : 2012-13 PAGE 1 OF 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, AHMEDABAD [ BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ] ITA NO. 1200/AHD/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 INCOME TAX OFFICER ............APPELLANT WARD 7 (2)(3), AHMEDABAD VS. LASHEEKA INFRASTRUCTURE .......................RESPONDENT 12, VISHWA KARMA ESTATE, N.H. NO. 8, THAKKAR BAPANAGAR, AHMEDABAD - 380015 [PAN : AADFL 8105 E] APPEARANCES BY: T SANKAR, FOR THE APPELLANT MK PATEL, FOR THE RESPONDENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : 04.10.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : 04.10.2018 O R D E R 1. BY WAY OF THIS APPEAL, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS CHALLENGED CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 8 TH FEBRUARY 2016, PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A)-7, AHM EDABAD FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13, ON THE FOLLOWING G ROUNDS: 1. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.41,45 800/- MAD E U/S 68 OF THE ACT BY THE AO, AS THE CIT(A) ADMITTED FRESH EVIDENCES I N CONTRAVENTION OF THE PROVISION OF RULE 46A OF THE I.T. RULE. 2. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND IN NOT APPRE CIATING THE FACT THAT SINCE THE APPELLANT WAS UNABLE TO FURNISH THE DETA ILS/EVIDENCE REGARDING IDENTITY OF THE DEPOSITORS AND THEIR CRED ITWORTHINESS AND GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS, THE LOAN TRANSACTI ON FROM 209 PERSONS (ALL BELOW RS.20,000/-) COULD NOT BE HELD AS EXPLAI NED AND HENCE CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING THE ENTIRE ADDITION. 3. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE AFORESA ID ADDITION OF RS.41,45,000/- MADE U/S 68 OF THE IT ACT, ONLY THE BASIS OF REMAND REPORT OF AO RELYING ON INQUIRIES MADE IN RESPECT O F SIX DEPOSITORS ONLY OUT OF TOTAL 209 DEPOSITORS. 2. AT THE OUTSET, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE PRESENT APPEAL OF THE REVENUE NEEDS TO BE DISMISSED ON ACCO UNT OF LOW TAX EFFECT IN VIEW OF THE RECENT CBDT CIRCULAR NO.3 OF 2018 DATED 11.0 7.2018.THE LEARNED SMC-ITA NO. 1200/AHD/2016 ITO VS. LASHEEKA INFRASTRUCTURE AY : 2012-13 PAGE 2 OF 2 DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FAIRLY ADMITTED THAT TH E TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IS LESS THAN THE LIMIT PRESCRIBED BY THE AFO RESAID CBDT CIRCULAR. 3. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED T HE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. I FIND THAT PRIMA-FACIE THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS NOT MAINTAINABLE IN VIEW OF THE RECENT CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 3/2018 IN F.NO .279/MISC. 142/2007-ITJ (PT) DATED 11 TH JULY, 2018, VIDE WHICH IT HAS BEEN DECIDED BY THE BOARD THAT NO DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS SHOULD BE FILED BEFORE THE TRI BUNAL IF THE TAX EFFECT BY VIRTUE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)S ORDER IS BELOW RS. 20 LACS. THE BOARD HAS PROVIDED EXEMPTIONS AT CLAUSE (10) OF THE INSTRUCTIONS WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN PROVIDED THAT THESE INSTRUCTIONS WILL NOT BE A PPLICABLE, WHERE THE CONSTITUTIONAL VALIDITY OF THE PROVISIONS OF AN ACT /RULE IS UNDER CHALLENGE OR WHERE BOARDS ORDER, NOTIFICATION, INSTRUCTION OR CIRCULA R HAS BEEN HELD TO BE ILLEGAL OR WHERE REVENUE AUDIT OBJECTION IN THE CASE HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OR WHERE THE ADDITION RELATES TO UNDISCLOSED FOREIG N ASSETS/BANK ACCOUNTS ETC. I FIND THAT THE PRESENT CASE DOES NOT FALL WITHIN THE EXEMPTION CLAUSE AND THE TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN RS.20 LACS. THEREFORE, THE PR ESENT APPEAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE AND HENCE DISMISSED. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISM ISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT TODAY ON THE 4 TH OCTOBER, 2018 SD/- PRAMOD KUMAR (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AHMEDABAD, THE 4 TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2018 **BT COPIES TO: (1) THE APPELLANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) COMMISSIONER (4) CIT(A) (5) DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER TRUE COPY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCHES, AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION: ......04.10.2018.......... 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE T HE DICTATING MEMBER: ... 04.10.2018... 3. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR . P.S./P.S.: 04.10.2018.. 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE TH E DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT: 04.10.2018.. 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK : .. 08.10.2018. 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK : . 7. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER : . 8. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER: ......