ACIT, Faridabad V. M/s. SVS Developers (P) Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 1498/DEL/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3614 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-07-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 11-07-2011
• Assessment Year: 2002-2003
• Appeal Filed On: 06-04-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GAJANAND MEENA
• Assessee Lawyers: RAJESH ARORA
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : G : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.E. VEERABHADRAPPA, HONBLE VICE PRESI DENT AND SHRI I.P. BANSAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOS.1497 TO 1500/DEL/2010 ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04 & 2005-06 ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, FARIDABAD. VS. SVS DEVELOPERS (P) LTD., 807, PRAKASHDEEP BUILDING, 7, TOLSTOY MARG, NEW DELHI. PAN : AABCS0986P (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI RAJESH ARORA, CA REVENUE BY : SHRI GAJANAND MEENA, CIT, DR ORDER PER I.P. BANSAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ALL THESE APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE REVENUE. THEY AR E DIRECTED AGAINST FOUR SEPARATE ORDERS PASSED BY THE CIT (A) DATED 29 TH JANUARY, 2010 FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04 & 20 05-06. 2. AT THE OUTSET, IT WAS POINTED OUT BY LD. AR THAT T AX EFFECT IN ALL THE PRESENT APPEALS EXCLUDING INTEREST IS BELOW ` 2 LAC . HE HAS FURNISHED A CHART IN THIS RESPECT THE COPY OF WHICH WA S ALSO GIVEN TO LD. DR. ACCORDING TO THE SAID CHART, THE TAX EFFECT EXC LUDING INTEREST FOR ALL THESE YEARS ARE AS UNDER:- ASSESSMENT YEAR ASSESSMENT YEAR ASSESSMENT YEAR ASSESSMENT YEAR TAX EFFECT TAX EFFECT TAX EFFECT TAX EFFECT 2001-02 75,330 2002-03 81,810 2003-04 1,70,344 2005-06 1,43,892 ITA NOS.1497 TO 1500/DEL/2010 2 3. TO CONTEND THAT TAX EFFECT HAS TO BE CALCULATED E XCLUDING INTEREST, LD. AR HAS REFERRED TO INSTRUCTION NO.5/2008 DATED 15 TH MAY, 2008, PARA 4 OF WHICH READ AS UNDER:- 4. FOR THIS PURPOSE, TAX EFFECT MEANS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TAX ON THE TOTAL INCOME ASSESSED AND THE TAX THA T WOULD HAVE BEEN CHARGEABLE HAD SUCH TOTAL INCOME BEEN REDUCED BY THE AMOUNT OF INCOME IN RESPECT OF THE ISSUE AGAINST WHICH APPEAL IS INTENDED TO BE FILED (HEREAFTER REFER RED TO AS DISPUTED ISSUES). HOWEVER, THE TAX WILL NOT INCLUDE ANY INTEREST THEREON. SIMILARLY, IN LOSS CASES NOTIONAL TAX EFFECT SHOULD BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT. IN THE CASES OF PENALTY O RDERS, THE TAX EFFECT WILL MEAN QUANTUM OF PENALTY DELETED OR REDUC ED IN THE ORDER TO BE APPEALED AGAINST. 4. HE HAS PLACED BEFORE US A COPY OF THE SAID INSTRUCTI ON AND A COPY WAS ALSO GIVEN TO LEARNED DR. 5. IN THIS MANNER, IT WAS SUBMITTED BY LEARNED AR THAT THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS SHOULD BE DISMISSED ON ACCOUNT OF L OW TAX EFFECT AS THEY SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN EVEN FILED ACCORDING TO THE AFOREMENTIONED INSTRUCTIONS. 6. HOWEVER, LD. DR RELIED UPON THE ASSESSMENT ORDERS. 7. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES ON THE SHORT ISSUE RE LATING TO LOW TAX EFFECT AND IT WAS FOUND THAT THE TAX EFFECT EXCL UDING INTEREST IN ALL THE FOUR YEARS IS BELOW ` 2 LAC AND THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A) FOR EACH YEAR IS A SEPARATE ORDER. THE CALCULATION OF TAX EFF ECT HAS NOT BEEN CONTROVERTED BY THE REVENUE. THEREFORE, THESE APPEA LS SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT AS THE TAX EFFECT IN ALL THESE APPEALS IS BELOW ` 2LAC. THEREFORE, ON ACCOUNT OF LO W TAX EFFECT, WE DISMISS THESE APPEALS IN LIMINE. ITA NOS.1497 TO 1500/DEL/2010 3 8. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS ARE DISMISSED IN THE M ANNER AFORESAID. THE ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11.07.20 11. SD/- SD/- [G.E. VEERABHADRAPPA] [I.P. BANSAL] VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED, 11.07.2011. DK COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, DEPUTY REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHES