The DCIT, Circle-1(2), Vadodara V. M/s. Kemrock Industries and Export Ltd., Vadodara

ITA 1481/AHD/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0537 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 3 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-09-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 17-09-2019
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 16-06-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

, D IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA NO.1481/AHD/2017 { / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 DCIT, CIR. 1(1)(2) VODODARA VS M/S KEMROCK INDUSTRIES & EXPORTS LTD. VILLAGE-ASOJ, HALOL EXPRESSWAY TAL: WAGHODIA DISTRICT-VADODARA PAN:AAACK8810B ! / (APPELLANT) '# ! / (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : SHRI VINOD TANWANI, SR. DR RESPONDENT BY : NONE / DATE OF HEARING : 17/09/2019 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 17/09/2019 $%/ O R D E R PER SHRI MANISH BORAD, A.M: THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A)-1, VADODARA DATED 14.03.2017 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. 2. WHEN THIS APPEAL IS TAKEN UP FOR HEARING, THE LD. D .R. HAS SUBMITTED THAT THIS APPEAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE IN VIEW OF THE CBDTS CIRCULAR NO.3/2018 AND SUBSEQUENT AMENDMENT THERETO DATED 8 TH AUGUST, 2019. IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT UNDER THE IDENTICAL FACTS, THE COORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER DATED 14.8.2019 IN ITA NO.1398/AHD/2004 AND ITA NO.1481/AHD/2017 KEMROCK INDUSTRIES & EXPORT FOR AY 2008-09 2 OTHERS AND IN THE CASE OF ITO VS. DINESH MADHAVLAL PATEL HAS DISMISSED THE REVENUES APPEALS REJECTING THE OBJEC TIONS OF THE REVENUE. 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND GON E THROUGH THE RECORDS. IT IS NOTED THAT IN THIS APPE AL, THE TAX EFFECT IS BELOW MONETARY LIMITS OF RS.50 LAKHS AS P RESCRIBED UNDER THE CBDT CIRCULAR NO.3/2018 DATED 8 TH AUGUST, 2019 (SUPRA). THE COORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO.1398/AHD/2004 AND OTHERS IN THE CASE OF ITO VS. DINESH MADHAVLAL PATEL (SUPRA) DECIDED THE ISSUE BY HOLDIN G AS UNDER: 1. THESE 628 APPEALS AND COS PERTAIN TO THE APPEAL S ARE FILED BY VARIOUS ASSESSING OFFICERS, ALL THESE APPEALS CALL INTO QUESTION CORRECTNESS OF THE RELIEF GRANTED TO THE TAXPAYERS BY THE COMMISSIONERS OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AND, MOST IMP ORTANTLY, THE TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN ALL THESE APPEALS DOES NOT E XCEED RS 50,00,000 IN EACH OF THESE APPEALS. THE CROSS OBJECTIONS TAKE N UP FOR HEARING ARE ONLY SUCH CROSS OBJECTIONS AS EMANATE FROM THES E APPEALS AND ARE BROADLY IN SUPPORT OF THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS). IN THESE CASES, IN THE LIGHT OF THE DISC USSIONS WITH THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (GUJARAT ) AND REPRESENTATIVES OF THE AHMEDABAD ITAT BAR ASSOCIATI ON, INDIVIDUAL NOTICES ARE DISPENSED WITH; NOTICES OF HEARING ARE GIVEN ONLY THROUGH THE NOTICE BOARD. 2. IT IS IN THIS BACKDROP THAT WE ARE PLEASED TO TA KE NOTE OF A VERY PRAGMATIC AND TAXPAYER FRIENDLY POLICY DECISION BY THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA FOR REDUCING THE INCOME TAX LITIGATION. VIDE CBDT CIRCULAR DATED 8TH AUGUST, 2019, THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT HAS FUR THER LIBERALIZED ITS POLICY FOR NOT FILING APPEALS AGAINST THE DECIS IONS OF THE APPELLATE AUTHORITIES IN FAVOUR OF THE TAXPAYERS, WHEREIN TAX INVOLVED IS BELOW CERTAIN THRESHOLD LIMITS, AND ANN OUNCED ITS POLICY DECISION NOT TO FILE, OR PRESS, THE APPEALS, BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL, AGAINST THE APPELLATE ORDERS FAVOURABLE TO THE ASSESSEE IN THE CASES IN WHICH OVERALL TAX EFFECT, EXCLUDING INTEREST EXCEPT WHEN INTEREST ITSELF IS IN DISPUTE, IS RS 50,00,000 OR LESS. WHAT IT MEANS, IN PLAIN WORDS, IS THAT WHEN A COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) GIVES THE TAXPAY ER TAX RELIEF OF UPTO RS 50 LAKHS IN AN APPEAL IN AN ASSESSMENT YEAR , THE MATTER ENDS THERE AND THE RELIEF SO GRANTED BY THE COMMISS IONER (APPEALS) ITA NO.1481/AHD/2017 KEMROCK INDUSTRIES & EXPORT FOR AY 2008-09 3 CANNOT BE CHALLENGED BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL, THAT WHE N THIS TRIBUNAL GIVES THE TAXPAYER RELIEF OF UPTO RS 1 CRORE IN AN APPEAL IN AN ASSESSMENT YEAR, THE MATTER ENDS THERE AND THE RELI EF SO GRANTED BY THE TRIBUNAL CANNOT BE CHALLENGED BEFORE THE HONBL E HIGH COURT, AND THAT WHEN HONBLE HIGH COURT GIVES RELIEF OF UPTO R S 2 CRORE TO THE TAXPAYER IN AN APPEAL IN AN ASSESSMENT YEAR, THAT R ELIEF CANNOT BE CHALLENGED BEFORE HONBLE SUPREME COURT. THESE MONE TARY THRESHOLD LIMITS FOR FILING OF APPEALS BY THE INCOME TAX AUTH ORITIES DO NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT INTEREST AND OTHER COROLLARIES OF THE TAX DEMANDS BEING CONFIRMED SUCH AS PENALTIES, EXCEPT WHEN A PENALTY ITSELF IS SUBJECT MATTER OF LITIGATION, AND PROSECUTIONS. THE ENHANCE MENT OF THESE MONETARY LIMITS IS AT AN UNPRECEDENTED SCALE. THE M ONETARY LIMIT FOR APPEALS BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL, WHICH WAS RS 3,00,000 TILL 10TH JULY 2014, HAS BEEN IN EFFECT ENHANCED TO ALMOST 1,700% IN THE LAST FIVE YEARS. THIS SUBSTANT IAL RELAXATION IS CERTAINLY A HUGE STEP WHICH SIGNIFIES TRUST REPOSED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA IN THE DECISIONS OF THE APPELLATE FORUMS, AND SUBSTANTIALLY CUTS DOWN TIME TAKEN IN THE FINALITY OF THE APPELLA TE PROCESS. IT IS INDEED HEARTENING TO NOTE THAT IN ONE STROKE, THE G OVERNMENT HAS NOT ONLY PREVENTED, BUT HAS, IN EFFECT, SET THE STAGE F OR WITHDRAWAL OF THOUSANDS OF APPEALS BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL AND BEFORE HONBLE COURTS ABOVE. IN AN ENV IRONMENT IN WHICH RETROSPECTIVELY WAS ATTACHED ONLY TO THE TAXA TION AND NOT TO TAX RELIEFS OR CONCESSIONS, SUCH AN APPROACH IS A PLEAS ANT DEPARTURE FROM LEGACY PRACTICES. 3. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACTUAL BACKGROUND AND THE GENEROUS CONCESSION BY THIS BENEVOLENT CBDT CIRCULAR, ALL TH ESE APPEALS MUST BE DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN AND THE RELATED CROSS OBJ ECTIONS MUST BE DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS. THERE IS, HOWEVER, A SMAL L ISSUE THAT WE MUST DEAL WITH. 4. SMT APARNA AGARWAL, LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESE NTATIVE, HOWEVER, HAS A POINT TO MAKE. SHE POINTS OUT THAT T HE CIRCULAR DATED 8TH AUGUST 2019 IS NOT CLEARLY RETROSPECTIVE INASMU CH AS IT SPECIFICALLY STATES IN PARA 4 THAT (T)HE SAID MODIFICATIONS SHALL COME INTO EFFECT FROM THE DATE OF ISSUE OF THIS CIR CULAR . IT IS THUS POINTED OUT THAT THIS SENTENCE GIVES AN IMPRES SION THAT IS ONLY AFTER THE DATE OF THE SAID CIRCULAR THAT THE DEPART MENTAL APPEALS WILL NOT BE FILED IN THE CASES WITHIN THE SPECIFIED TAX EFFECT LIMITS. WE ARE URGED TO BEAR IN MIND THE IMPACT OF THIS OBSERVATIO N WHILE GIVING EFFECT TO THE CIRCULAR DATED 8TH AUGUST, 2019. SHE, HOWEVER, HASTENS TO ADD THAT SHE IS YET TO HAVE ANY SPECIFIC INSTRUC TIONS ON THE ISSUE AND SHE LEAVES IT FOR THE BENCH TO TAKE THE APPROPR IATE CALL. LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES APPEARING FOR THE TAXPAYERS VEHEMEN TLY OPPOSE THE SUGGESTION IMPLICIT IN HER SUBMISSIONS. ALL OF THEM ARE UNANIMOUS IN THEIR ARGUMENT THAT THE CIRCULAR MUST BE HELD TO HA VE RETROSPECTIVE ITA NO.1481/AHD/2017 KEMROCK INDUSTRIES & EXPORT FOR AY 2008-09 4 APPLICATION AND MUST EQUALLY APPLY TO THE PENDING A PPEALS AS WELL. SHRI J P SHAH, SENIOR ADVOCATE, POINTS OUT THAT THE CIRCULAR DATED 8TH AUGUST 2019 IS NOT A STANDALONE CIRCULAR AND IT IS REQUIRED TO BE READ WITH THE OLD CIRCULAR NO. 3 OF 2018 WHICH IS WHAT I T SEEKS TO MODIFY. THIS CIRCULAR, ACCORDING TO THE LEARNED COUNSEL, ON LY ENHANCES THE MONETARY LIMITS AND GIVES FURTHER RELAXATION. HE UR GES US NOT TO READ THE CIRCULAR IN A MANNER SO AS TO NULLIFY THE UNDER LYING APPROACH AND OBJECT OF REDUCING LITIGATION. SHRI SOPARKAR, LEARN ED SENIOR ADVOCATE, SUBMITS THAT ALL THAT THE PRESENT CIRCULAR DOES IS TO MODIFY THE MONETARY LIMITS AND NOTHING MORE, AND, THEREFORE, I T CANNOT BE TREATED TO FOLLOW ANY OTHER APPROACH OTHER THAN THE APPROAC H FOLLOWED IN THE OLD CIRCULAR. THE OLD CIRCULAR, BEYOND ANY DISPUTE OR CONTROVERSY, CATEGORICALLY APPLIED TO THE PENDING APPEALS AS ON THE DATE OF ISSUANCE OF CIRCULAR. SHRI TUSHAR HEMANI, LEARNED S ENIOR ADVOCATE, POINTS OUT THAT THE CIRCULAR DATED 8TH AUGUST 2019 ONLY GIVES FURTHER RELIEF NOT ONLY IN TERMS OF THE MONETARY LIMITS BUT ALSO IN TERMS OF THE MANNER IN WHICH THE APPLICATION OF CIRCULAR TO ORDE RS DEALING WITH MORE THAN ONE YEAR IS TO MADE. SHRI S N DIVETIA, LE ARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, SUBMITS THAT UNLIKE IN THE CASES OF E ARLIER CBDT CIRCULARS, WHICH USED TO BE IN SUPERSESSION OF EARL IER CIRCULARS ON THE ISSUES, THE CIRCULAR DATED 8TH AUGUST 2019 ONLY MOD IFIES THE EARLIER CIRCULAR WHICH, INTER ALIA, PROVIDED FOR ITS RETROS PECTIVE APPLICATION. OUR ATTENTION IS INVITED TO SOME JUDICIAL PRECEDENT S IN SUPPORT OF THE CONTENTION THAT THE BENEVOLENT CIRCULAR, SUCH AS TH E ONE IN QUESTION, IS TO BE GIVEN EFFECT IN RESPECT OF THE PENDING APPEAL S AS WELL. MS URVASHI SHODHAN, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, POINTS OUTS THAT ITS PLAINLY CONTRARY TO THE SCHEME OF THE LITIGATIO N POLICY OF THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA TO GIVE THIS CIRCULAR ONLY PROS PECTIVE EFFECT. SHRI S K SADHWANI, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, INVIT ES OUR ATTENTION TO THE LETTER DATED 16TH JULY 2018 ISSUED BY MEMBER CB DT TO THE ALL THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONERS OF INCOME TAX, IN THE CONTEXT OF CIRCULAR DATED 11 TH JULY 2018 THAT THE PRESENT CIRCULAR SEEKS TO MODIF Y, SEEKING REPORT ON WITHDRAWAL OF THE APPEALS COVERED BY THE CIRCULAR. HE THEN POINTS OUT THAT IT IS THE OLD CIRCULAR IS S TILL ALIVE TODAY AND THE ONLY CHANGE IS WITH RESPECT TO THE MONETARY LIMITS. IN ALL FAIRNESS, THEREFORE, THE SAME APPROACH REGARDING WITHDRAWAL O F PENDING APPEALS MUST BE FOLLOWED FOR THIS CIRCULAR AS WELL. ON THE SAME LINES, ARGUMENTS ARE ADVANCED BY THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIV ES WHICH, FOR THE SAKE OF BREVITY AND TO AVOID REPETITION, WE ARE NOT REFERRING TO IN MORE SPECIFIC DETAILS. IN BRIEF REJOINDER, LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE GRACIOUSLY LEAVES THE MATTER TO US. 5. HAVING CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND HAVI NG PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD, WE DO NOT HAVE SLIGHTEST OF HES ITATION IN HOLDING THAT THE CONCESSION EXTENDED BY THE CBDT NOT ONLY A PPLIES TO THE APPEALS TO BE FILED IN FUTURE BUT IT IS ALSO EQUALL Y APPLICABLE TO THE APPEALS PENDING FOR DISPOSAL AS ON NOW. OUR LINE OF REASONING IS THIS. ITA NO.1481/AHD/2017 KEMROCK INDUSTRIES & EXPORT FOR AY 2008-09 5 THE CIRCULAR DATED 8TH AUGUST 2019 IS NOT A STANDAL ONE CIRCULAR. IT IS TO BE READ IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE CBDT CIRCULAR NO 3 OF 2018 (AND SUBSEQUENT AMENDMENT THERETO), AND ALL IT DOES IS T O REPLACE PARAGRAPH NOS. 3 AND 5 OF THE SAID CIRCULAR. THIS IS EVIDENT FROM THE FOLLOWING EXTRACTS FROM THE CIRCULAR DATED 8 TH AUGUST 2019: 2. AS A STEP TOWARDS FURTHER MANAGEMENT OF LITIGATI ON. IT HAS BEEN DECIDED BY THE BOARD THAT MONETARY LIMITS FOR FILING OF APPEALS IN INCOME-TAX CASES BE ENHANCED FURTHER THR OUGH AMENDMENT IN PARA 3 OF THE CIRCULAR MENTIONED ABOVE AND ACCORDINGLY. THE TABLE FOR MONETARY LIMITS SPECIFIE D IN PARA 3 OF THE CIRCULAR SHALL READ AS FOLLOWS: S.NO. APPEALS/SLPS IN INCOME-TAX MATTERS MONETARY L IMIT (RS.) 1 BEFORE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 50,00,000 2 BEFORE HIGH COURT 1,00,00,000 3 BEFORE SUPREME COURT 2,00,00,000 3. FURTHER, WITH A VIEW TO PROVIDE PARITY IN FILING OF APPEALS IN SCENARIOS WHERE SEPARATE ORDER IS PASSED BY HIGHER APPELLATE AUTHORITIES FOR EACH ASSESSMENT YEAR VIS-A-VIS WHER E COMPOSITE ORDER FOR MORE THAN ONE ASSESSMENT YEARS IS PASSED. PARA 5 OF THE CIRCULAR IS SUBSTITUTED BY THE FOLLOWING PARA: 5. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL CALCULATE THE TAX EFFECT SEPARATELY FOR EVERY ASSESSMENT YEAR IN RESPECT OF THE DISPUTED ISSUES IN THE CASE OF EVERY ASSESSEE. IF IN THE CASE OF AN ASSESSEE, THE DISPUT ED ISSUES ARISE IN MORE THAN ONE ASSESSMENT YEAR, APPEAL CAN BE FILED IN RESPECT OF SUCH ASSESSMENT YEAR OR YEARS IN WHICH THE TAX EFFECT IN RESPECT OF THE DISPUTED ISSUES EXCEEDS THE MONETARY LIMIT SPECIFIED IN PARA 3. NOAPPEAL SHALL BE FILED IN RESPECT OF AN ASSESSMENT YEAR OR YEARS IN WHICH THE TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN THE MONETARY LIMIT SPECIFIE D IN PARA 3. FURTHER, EVEN IN THE CASE OF COMPOSITE ORDER OF ANY HIGH COURT OR APPELLATE AUTHORITY WHICH INVOLVES MORE THAN ONE ASSESSMENT YEAR AND COMMON ISSUES IN MORE THAN ONE ASSESSMENT YEAR NO APPEAL SHALL BE FILED IN RESPECT OF AN ASSESSMEN T YEAR OR YEARS IN WHICH THE TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN THE MONETARY LIMIT SPECIFIED IN PARA 3. IN CASE WHERE A COMPOSITE ORDER/ JUDGEMENT INVOLVES MORE THAN ONE ASSESSEE, EACH ASSESSEE SHALL BE DEALT WITH SEPARATELY 4. THE SAID MODIFICATIONS SHALL COME INTO EFFECT FR OM THE DATE OF ISSUE OF THIS CIRCULAR. ITA NO.1481/AHD/2017 KEMROCK INDUSTRIES & EXPORT FOR AY 2008-09 6 6. CLEARLY, ALL OTHER PORTIONS OF THE CIRCULAR NO. 3 OF 2018 (SUPRA) HAVE REMAINED INTACT. THE PORTION WHICH HAS REMAINED INT ACT INCLUDES PARAGRAPH 13 OF THE AFORESAID CIRCULAR WHICH IS AS FOLLOWS: 13. THIS CIRCULAR WILL APPLY TO SLPS/ APPEALS/ CROS S OBJECTIONS/ REFERENCES TO BE FILED HENCEFORTH IN SC/HCS/TRIBUNAL AND IT SHALL ALSO APPLY RETROSPECTI VELY TO PENDING SLPS/ APPEALS/ CROSS OBJECTIONS/REFERENC ES. PENDING APPEALS BELOW THE SPECIFIED TAX LIMITS IN P ARE 3 ABOVE MAY BE WITHDRAWN/ NOT PRESSED. 7. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSIONS, WE HEREBY HOLD THAT THE RELAXATION IN MONETARY LIMITS FOR DEPARTMENTAL APPE ALS, VIDE CBDT CIRCULAR DATED 8TH AUGUST 2019 (SUPRA) SHALL BE APP LICABLE TO THE PENDING APPEALS IN ADDITION TO THE APPEALS TO BE FI LED HENCEFORTH. 8. LEARNED COMMISSIONER (DR) THEN SUBMITS LIBERTY M AY KINDLY BE GIVEN TO POINT OUT, UPON NECESSARY FURTHER VERIFICA TIONS, AND TO SEEK RECALL THE DISMISSAL OF APPEALS AND RESTORATION OF THE APPEALS IN THE CASES (I) IN WHICH IT CAN BE DEMONSTRATED THAT THE APPEALS ARE COVERED BY THE EXCEPTIONS, AND (II) WHICH ARE INADVERTENTLY INCLUDED IN THIS BUNCH OF APPEALS, WHEREIN THE TAX EFFECT, IN TERMS OF THE CBDT CIRCULAR (SUPRA), EXCEEDS RS 50,00,000. NONE OPPOSES THIS PR AYER; WE ACCEPT THE SAME. WE MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THE APPELLANTS SHAL L BE AT LIBERTY TO POINT OUT THE CASES WHICH ARE WRONGLY INCLUDED IN T HE APPEALS SO SUMMARILY DISMISSED, EITHER OWING TO WRONG COMPUTAT ION OF TAX EFFECT OR OWNING TO SUCH CASES BEING COVERED BY THE PERMIS SIBLE EXCEPTIONS- OR FOR ANY OTHER REASON, AND WE WILL TAKE APPROPRIA TE REMEDIAL STEPS IN THIS REGARD. 9. IN THE LIGHT OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSIONS, ALL THE A PPEALS STAND DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN. AS THE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE ARE FOUND TO BE NON-MAINTAINABLE AND AS ALL THE RELATED CROSS-OBJECTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE ARISE ONLY AS A RESULT OF THOSE APP EALS AND MERELY SUPPORT THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A), THE CROSS OBJECTIO NS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALSO DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS. ORDERED , ACCORDINGLY. 10. AS WE PART WITH THE MATTER, WE MUST PLACE ON RE CORD OUR DEEP APPRECIATION TO OUR OWN TEAM WHICH HAS PAINSTAKINGL Y IDENTIFIED ALL THESE LOW TAX EFFECT APPEALS IN THE LONG WEEKEND AN D LESS THAN TWO WORKING DAYS, TO THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER O F INCOME TAX GUJARAT, AS ALSO THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENT ATIVES, FOR HIS IMMENSE HELP, COOPERATION AND ACTIVE INVOLVEMENT IN SPEEDILY DISPOSING OF THESE APPEALS, AND, OF COURSE, TO THE ITAT BAR ASSOCIATION AHMEDABAD FOR THEIR WHOLE HEARTED COOPE RATION IN THIS SPECIAL DRIVE. THE CIRCULAR WAS ISSUED ON THURSDAY THE 8TH AUGUST 2019, AND WITHIN TWO WORKING DAYS AND THE LONG WEEK END, TODAY ON 14TH AUGUST 2019, ALL THE APPEALS STAND DISPOSED OF . ITS ONLY A TEAM ITA NO.1481/AHD/2017 KEMROCK INDUSTRIES & EXPORT FOR AY 2008-09 7 EFFORT AND WHOLE HEARTED COOPERATION OF ALL THE STA KEHOLDERS THAT CAN ENABLE US TO SO SPEEDILY IMPLEMENT TAXPAYER FRIENDL Y INITIATIVES OF THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA.THE TAXPAYER RELIEF INVOLVED IN THESE APPEALS, INCLUDING INTEREST AND THE OTHER COROLLARIES, IS ES TIMATED TO BE WELL OVER RS 350 CRORES. THE LEAD CASE BEFORE US IS AN A PPEAL FILED OVER FIFTEEN YEARS AGO BY THE INCOME TAX OFFICER AND IT DEALS WITH AN ASSESSMENT YEAR WHICH PERTAINS TO THE PERIOD OVER T WENTY YEARS AGO. YET, THE MATTER HAD NOT REACHED THE FINALITY AND TH E REVENUES CHALLENGE TO THE RELIEF GRANTED BY THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) HAD REMAINED UNDECIDED. THAT IS NOTHING BUT PROLONGED A GONY OF UNCERTAINTY TO THE TAXPAYERS. IT IS INDEED AN APPRE CIABLE GOODWILL GESTURE BY THE GOVERNMENT, FOR SO MANY TAXPAYERS, O N THE EVE OF THIS INDEPENDENCE DAY AND OFFERING THEM FREEDOM FROM THE PROLONGED MENTAL AGONY AND UNCERTAINTY OF LITIGATION. 11. IN THE RESULTS, ALL THE APPEALS ARE DISMISSED A S WITHDRAWN AND THE CROSS OBJECTIONS ARE DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT TODAY ON THE 14TH AUGUST, 2019. 4. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE COOR DINATE BENCH, WE HEREBY DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IN LIMINE WITHOUT GOING TO THE MERITS OF THE CASE. 5. IN THE RESULT, DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 17.09.2019. SD/- SD/- (AMARJIT SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ( MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 17 /09/2019 PATEL, PS ITA NO.1481/AHD/2017 KEMROCK INDUSTRIES & EXPORT FOR AY 2008-09 8 $% & ''() *$)' / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ! / CONCERNED CIT 4. ! ( ) / THE CIT(A)- XV, AHMEDABAD 5. $%& '' , , )*++ / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. &,- . / GUARD FILE. $% + / BY ORDER, TRUE COPY ,/ - ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, AHMEDABAD