ITO, Bangalore V. M/s. Y P Duttakumar(HUF), Bangalore

ITA 1396/BANG/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 51280 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-09-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 29-09-2011
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 07-12-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: UMAPATHI
• Keywords: Retrospective amendment; Tax effect

Judgement Text

PAGE 1 OF 4 ITA NOS.1392 TO 1396 /BANG/2010 1 INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES A BEFORE SHRI N K SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOS.1392 TO 1396/BANG/2010 (ASST. YEARS 2005-06 TO 2009-2010) THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-16(2), TDS, BANGALORE. - APPELLANT VS M/S Y P DUTTAKUMAR (HUF), 656/5, 11 TH CROSS, 7 TH BLOCK, JAYANGAR, BANGALORE-82. - RESPONDENT PA NO.AAAHY2117C DATE OF HEARING : 29/09/2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29/09/2011 APPELLANT BY : SHRI UMAPATHI, ADDL. CIT RESPONDENT BY : NONE O R D E R PER BENCH THESE FIVE APPEALS BY THE DEPARTMENT ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE CONSOLIDATED ORDER OF THE CIT(A)-V, BANGALORE DATED 17/9/2009.. THE RELEVANT ASST. YEARS ARE 2005-06 TO 2009-2010. PAGE 2 OF 4 ITA NOS.1392 TO 1396 /BANG/2010 2 2. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, NOBODY WAS PRESEN T ON BEHALF OF THE ASESSEE. IT IS NOTICED THAT TAX EFFECT IN THES E APPEALS IS LESS THE AMOUNT PRESCRIBED BY THE CBDT WHERE DEPARTMENT OUGHT NOT TO HAVE FILED THE APPEAL. 3. THE LEARNED DR ALTHOUGH SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE AO BUT COULD NOT CONTROVERT THE AFORESAID FACT THAT THE TA X EFFECT IN EACH APPEAL IS LESS THAN RS.2,00,000/-. 4. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF LEARNED DR AND THE MATERIAL ON RECORD, IT IS NOTICED THAT SECTION 268A HAS BEEN INSERTED BY THE FINANCE ACT, 2008 WITH RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT FROM 01 /04/99. THE PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN SECTION 268A READ AS UNDER:- 268A (1) THE BOARD MAY, FROM TIME TO TIME, ISSUE ORDERS, INSTRUCTIONS OR DIRECTIONS TO OTHER INCOME- TAX AUTHORITIES, FIXING SUCH MONETARY LIMITS AS IT MAY D EEM FIT, FOR THE PURPOSE OF REGULATING FILING OF APPEAL OR APPLICATION FOR REFERENCE BY ANY INCOME-TAX AUTHORITY UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THIS CHAPTER. (2) WHERE, IN PURSUANCE OF THE ORDERS, INSTRUCTIONS OR DIRECTIONS ISSUED UNDER SUB-SECTION (1), AN INCOME- TAX AUTHORITY HAS NOT FILED ANY APPEAL OR APPLICATION FOR REFERENCE ON ANY ISSUE IN THE CASE OF AN ASSESSEE F OR ANY ASSESSMENT YEAR, IT SHALL NOT PRECLUDE SUCH AUTHORIT Y FROM FILING AN APPEAL OR APPLICATION FOR REFERENCE ON THE SAME ISSUE IN THE CASE OF - (A) THE SAME ASSESSEE FOR ANY OTHER ASSESSMENT YEAR; OR PAGE 3 OF 4 ITA NOS.1392 TO 1396 /BANG/2010 3 (B) ANY OTHER ASSESSEE FOR THE SAME OR ANY OTHER ASSESSMENT YEAR. (3) NOTWITHSTANDING THAT NO APPEAL OR APPLICATION FOR REFERENCE HAS BEEN FILED BY AN INCOME-TAX AUTHORITY PURSUANT TO THE ORDERS OR INSTRUCTIONS OR DIRECTIONS ISSUED UNDER SUB-SECTION (1), IT SHALL N OT BE LAWFUL FOR AN ASSESSEE, BEING A PARTY IN ANY APPEAL OR REFERENCE, TO CONTEND THAT THE INCOME- TAX AUTHORITY HAS ACQUIESCED IN THE DECISION ON THE DISPUTED ISSUE BY NOT FILING AN APPEAL OR APPLICATIO N FOR REFERENCE IN ANY CASE. (4) THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL OR COURT, HEARING SUCH APPEAL OR REFERENCE, SHALL HAVE REGARD TO THE ORDERS, INSTRUCTIONS OR DIRECTIONS ISSUED UNDER SUB-SECTION (1) AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH SUCH APPEAL OR APPLICATION FOR REFERENCE WAS FILED OR NOT FILED IN RESPECT OF ANY CASE. (5) EVERY ORDER, INSTRUCTION OR DIRECTION WHICH HAS BEEN ISSUED BY THE BOARD FIXING MONETARY LIMITS FOR FILING AN APPEAL OR APPLICATION FOR REFERENCE SHALL BE DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN ISSUED UNDER SUB- SECTION (1) AND THE PROVISIONS OF SUB-SECTIONS (2), (3) AND (4) SHALL APPLY ACCORDINGLY. 5. IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE THAT THE BOARDS INSTRUCTI ON OR DIRECTIONS ISSUED TO THE OTHER INCOME-TAX AUTHORITI ES ARE BINDING ON THOSE AUTHORITIES, THEREFORE, THE DEPARTMENT OUGHT NOT TO HAVE FILED THESE APPEALS IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE MENTIONED SECTIO N 268A SINCE THE TAX EFFECT IN THE PRESENT CASES IS LESS THAN THE AM OUNT PRESCRIBED FOR NOT FILING THE APPEAL, SO THESE APPEALS ARE DISMISS ED. PAGE 4 OF 4 ITA NOS.1392 TO 1396 /BANG/2010 4 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 29 TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2011 SD/- SD/- (GEORGE GEORGE K) (N K SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PLACE : BANGALORE, DATED : SEPTEMBER, 2011. COPY TO:- 1.THE REVENUE 2. THE ASSESSEE 3. THE CIT CONCE RNED 4. THE CIT(A) CONCERNED 5. THE DR 6. GF MSP/-