Income Tax Officer,Ward -7(1), Nagpur V. M/s. Gaurav Multilayers Private Limited., Nagpur

ITA 13/NAG/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9642 (ITAT-NAGPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-10-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 28-01-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR MILIND BHUSARI; K JOHN VIKRAM
• Assessee Lawyers: M MANI
• Keywords: Question of law; Tax effect

Judgement Text

ITA NO. 13/NAG/2011 GAURAV MULTILAYERS P LTD, NAGPUR IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH , NAGPUR BEFORE: SHRI P.K. BANSAL , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI D.T. GARASIA , JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 13 / NAG /20 1 1 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 200 6 - 0 7 ITO WARD - 7(1) NAGPUR VS. GAURAV MULTILA YERS P LTD NAGPUR (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. AABCG 3218L APPELLANT BY: SHRI K. JOHN VIKRAM, JCIT & DR. MILIND BHUSARI, CIT(DR) RESPONDENT BY: SHRI M. MANI, ADVOCATE DATE OF HEARING: 18.10.12 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 19.10.12 ORDER PER BENCH: TH I S APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) DATED 06.12.2010 ON VARIOUS GROUNDS. 2 . AT THE OUTSET OF HEARING, THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE RAISED A PRELIMINARY OBJECTION BY POINTING OUT INSTRUCTION NO. 3/2011 DATE D 09.02.2011 ISSUED BY THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES (CBDT) FIXING THE MONETARY LIMITS FOR FILING OF DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. IN TERMS OF THE SAID INSTRUCTION, MONETARY LIMIT FOR FILING DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL TO THE TRIBUNAL HAS BEEN FIXE D AT RS 3 LAKHS. IN OTHER WORDS, IN CASES WHERE THE TAX EFFECT OF THE ADDITIONS DELETED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX (APPEALS) IS LESS THAN RS 3 LAKHS, NO APPEAL SHALL BE FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT IN SUCH CASES. ACCORDING TO THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVE, THE TAX EFFECT WITH RESPECT TO THE RELIEF ALLOWED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX (A PPEALS) IN THE CAPTIONED APPEAL IS BELOW RS 3 LAKHS. SUCH FACTUAL MATRIX HAS NOT BEEN CONTESTED BY THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE REVENUE, THOUGH THE REL IEF ALLOWED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX (APPEALS) IS SOUGHT TO BE ASSAILED ON MERITS . 3 . WE FIND THAT IN A RECENT DECISION, THE CO - ORDINATE BENCH OF ITAT MUMBAI, IN THE CASE OF ITO V SHRI ASHOK G. DHANDHARIAI, MUMBAI IN ITA NO2460/MUM/2010 ITA NO.13/NAG/2011 GAURAV MULTILAYERS P LTD, NAGPUR 2 DATED 28. 2.2011 HELD THAT THE REVISED INSTRUCTIONS DATED 9.2.2011 (SUPRA) ARE APPLICABLE TO THE PRESENT CASES ALSO, ALTHOUGH SUCH APPEALS HAVE BEEN FILED ON A PRIOR DATE. 4 . IN VIEW OF THE PRECEDENT BROUGHT OUT BY THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE RESPONDENT, FA CT UALLY THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL IS LIABLE TO BE CONSIDERED TO HAVE BEEN FILED CONTRARY TO THE CBDT INSTRUCTIONS DATED 9.2.2011 (SUPRA). THE TRIBUNAL FOLLOWING THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V MADHUKAR K. INAMDAR (HUF) 318 IT R 149 AND CIT V PITHWA ENGINEERING WORKS 276 ITR 519 (BOM) FOUND IT APPROPRIATE TO DISMISS THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL ON THE GROUND THAT TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN RS 3 LAKHS , EVEN IN A CASE WHERE THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL S WAS FILED PRIOR TO THE DATE OF THE CBDT INSTRUCTION DATED 9.2.2011 (SUPRA) . THE FOLLOWING DISCUSSION IN THE ORDER IS WORTHY OF NOTICE: 5. WE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES. THE CASE OF CIT VS. CHHAJER PACKAGING & PLASTICS PVT. LTD. 300 ITR RELIED ON BY THE DR IS DISTINGUISHABLE FROM THE FACTS OF THE PR ESENT CASE. AT PARA 12 PAGE 184 OF THE DECISION IN THE CASE OF CHHAJER PACKAGING & PLASTICS PVT. LTD. IT HAS BEEN HELD AS FOLLOWS: OTHERWISE ALSO, PARAGRAPH OF THIS CIRCULAR ITSELF SAVES CERTAIN APPEALS FROM BEING OBSTRUCTED DUE TO FINANCIAL LIMITS. PARAG RAPH 3 READS: THE BOARD HAS ALSO DECIDED THAT IN CASES INVOLVING SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW OF IMPORTANCE AS WELL AS IN CASES WHERE THE SAME QUESTION OF LAW WILL REPEATEDLY ARISE, EITHER IN THE CASE CONCERNED OR IN SIMILAR CASES, SHOULD BE SEPARATELY CON SIDERED ON THE MERITS WITHOUT BEING HINDERED BY THE MONETARY LIMITS. IT IS EVIDENT THAT, WHENEVER THERE IS A SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW, OR QUESTION OF LAW WHICH IS LIKELY TO RECUR IN FUTURE, THE DEPARTMENT IS NOT PROHIBITED FROM FILING AND PURSUING APPE ALS. WE BELIEVE THAT THE SAVING CLAUSE SAVES THE PRESENT APPEAL SINCE IT INVOLVES A QUESTION OF LAW REGARDING INTERPRETATION OF SECTION 275(1) (C) OF THE ACT, AND MORE PARTICULARLY TH E ASPECT OF MANNER IN WHICH THE LIMITATION SHOULD BE COMPUTED IN THE LIGHT OF THE SAID PROVISIONS. WE HAVE, THEREFORE, PROCEEDED TO HEAR THE ADVOCATES ON THE MERITS. IN OUR OPINION, THE CASE OF CIT V CHHAJER WAS WITH RESPECT OF INTERPRETATION OF 275(1) (C) OF THE ACT AND HENCE CAME UNDER THE EXCEPTION CLAUSE UNDER THE CBDT CIRCUL AR AND WAS NOT OBSTRUCTED BY THE MONETARY LIMIT OF RS 3 LAKHS PRESCRIBED BY THE CIRCULAR. THEREFORE THE CASE OF 300 ITR 180 IS INAPPLICABLE TO THE FACTS OF OUR CASE. FURTHER ITA NO.13/NAG/2011 GAURAV MULTILAYERS P LTD, NAGPUR 3 INSTRUCTION NO. 5 DT. 15.5.2008 FIXING THE MONETARY LIMIT AT RS 2 LAKHS IS SIMILAR TO THAT OF INSTRUCTION NO. 3 DATED 9.2.2011 WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAS BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE IN SUPPORT OF HIS CONTENTION. SINCE BOTH THE INSTRUCTION NOS. 5 & 3 ARE IDENTICAL, THE RATIO OF THE DECISION IN THE CASE OF CIT V PITHWA ENGG. WORK WHICH DEALS WITH I NSTRUCTION NO. 5 DT. 15.5.2008 SHALL EQUALLY APPLY TO THE PRESENT CASE WHICH FALLS UNDER INSTRUCTION NO. 3 DATED 9.2.2011. FOLLOWING THE RATIO OF THE DECISION IN THE CASE OF CIT V PITHWA ENGG. WORK WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT IN OUR VIEW, THE BOARD S C IRCULAR DT. 27 TH MARCH, 2000 IS VERY MUCH APPLICABLE EVEN TO THE OLD REFERENCES WHICH ARE STILL UNDECIDED , WE DISMISS THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL ON THE GROUND THAT THE TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN 3 LAKHS. 5. FOLLOWING THE AFORESAID PRECEDENT, THE CAPTIONED APPE AL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED I N VIEW OF CBDT INSTRUCTION NO. 3 DATED 9.2.2011 (SUPRA) AS THE TAX EFFECT WITH RESPECT TO THE QUANTUM OF RELIEF ALLOWED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX (APPEALS) IS BELOW RS 3 LAKHS AND IT HAS NOT BEEN SHOWN THAT THE APPEAL FALL S UNDER ANY OF THE EXCEPTIONS PROVIDED IN PARA 8 OF THE CBDT INSTRUCTION (SUPRA). WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 19.10 .201 2 SD/ - SD/ - ( D.T. GARASIA ) ( P.K. BANSAL ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VG/SPS NAGPUR DATED 19 TH OCTOBER , 20 1 2 COPY TO 1 ITO WARD - 7(1), NAGPUR 2 GAURAV MULTILAYERS PRIVATE LIMITED, C/O N - 1, MIDC, HINGNA, NAGPUR 3 THE CIT - IV, NAGPUR 4 THE CIT(A), 5 THE DR, ITAT, 6 GUARD FILE. BY ORDER SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR