ITO 14(3)-2, MUMBAI V. DEVIDAS SOONDERDAS & CO., MUMBAI

ITA 1379/MUM/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 88603 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 1 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-03-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 15-12-2014
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 15-02-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R I CHOKSEY
• Assessee Lawyers: LOVE KUMAR
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, MUM BAI BEFORE S/SHRI B.R.BASKARAN (AM) AND AMIT SHUKLA, (JM) . . , , ./I.T.A. NO.1382 AND 1379/MUM/2011 ( ! / ASSESSMENT YEARS :2005-06 & 2007-08) INCOME TAX OFFICER 14(3)(2), 6 TH FLOOR, EARNEST HOUSE, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI-400021 / VS. M/S DEVIDAS SOONDERDAS AND CO., 220, VIJAY GALLI, M J MARKET, MUMBAI-400002 ( '# / APPELLANT) .. ( $%'# / RESPONDENT) ' ./ &' ./PAN/GIR NO. :AAAFD1703F '# ( / ASSESSEES BY SHRI LOVE KUMAR $%'# ) ( /REVENUE BY SHRI R I CHOKSEY * ) + / DATE OF HEARING : 17.3.2015 ,-! ) + /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 17.3.2015 / O R D E R PER B.R. BASKARAN (AM) THE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE ARE DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE TWO SEPARATE ORDERS DATED 15.12.2010 PASSED BY THE LD.C IT(A)-25, MUMBAI AND THEY RELATE TO THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2005-06 AND 2007-08. FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, THESE APPEALS ARE BEING DISPOS ED BY THIS COMMON ORDER. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSES SEE SUBMITTED THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN BOTH THE APPEALS IS LESS THAN RS. 3 LAKHS AND HENCE BY I.T.A. NO.1382 & 1379/MUM/2011 2 VIRTUE OF CBDT INSTRUCTION NO.3 OF 2011 DATED 9.2.2 011, THE REVENUE IS PRECLUDED FROM FILING THE PRESENT APPEALS. 3. THE LD. AR ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THE ISSUE CONTEST ED IN THESE APPEALS DOES NOT FALL IN ANY OF THE EXCEPTIONS PROVIDED IN THE CIRCULAR REFERRED ABOVE. ACCORDINGLY, HE SUBMITTED THAT BOTH THESE A PPEALS ARE LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED IN LIMINE. 4. THE LD. DR DID NOT OBJECT TO THE FACTUAL ASPECT PRESENTED BY THE LD. AR. 5. HAVING REGARD TO THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE LD. AR AND ALSO THE CIRCULAR OF CBDT REFERRED ABOVE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT BOTH THESE APPEALS ARE LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED IN-LIMINE, AS UN -ADMITTED AS THEY ARE CONTRARY TO THE BINDING CIRCULAR ISSUED BY THE CBD T. ACCORDINGLY WE DISMISS BOTH THE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE ARE DI SMISSED. THE AB OVE ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 17 TH MARCH, 2015. ,-! . /0 17 TH MARCH, 2015 - ) 1* 2 SD SD ( / AMIT SHUKLA ) ( . . / B.R. BASKARAN) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER * MUMBAI: 17 TH MARCH,2015. . . ./ SRL , SR. PS I.T.A. NO.1382 & 1379/MUM/2011 3 ' #$%& '&($ / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. '# / THE APPELLANT 2. $%'# / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A)- CONCERNED 4. / CIT CONCERNED 5. 341 $5 , + 5 , * / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI CONCERNED 6. 1 6* / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, TRUE COPY 7 & (ASSTT. REGISTRAR) + 5 , * /ITAT, MUMBAI