ITO, Vellore V. M/s. Sankar Sarees, Arni

ITA 157/CHNY/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4902 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-06-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2002-2003
• Appeal Filed On: 15-02-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: MAYA J NICHANE
• Keywords: Tax effect
• Section: 15

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHENNAI A BENCH, CHENNAI. BEFORE SHRI.U.B.S. BEDI, J.M. & SHRI. N.S. SAINI, A .M. I.T.A. NO.157/MDS/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2002-03 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD I (3), VELLORE. VS. M/S. SANKAR SAREES, NO.51, PALANI ANDAVAR KOIL ST., ARNI. [PAN:AAAFS8132M] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : SHRI SHAJI P JACOB ASSESSEE BY : MS. MAYA J. NICHANE ORDER PER U.B.S. BEDI, J.M. THIS APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT IS DIRECTED AGAINST ORDER OF DELETION OF PENALTY OF ` .3.00 LAKHS [IMPOSED UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C)] BY TH E LD. CIT(A) IX, CHENNAI THROUGH CONSOLIDATED ORDER PASSED ON 10.11. 2009 FOR THREE DIFFERENT ASSESSMENT YEARS I.E. 2002-03, 03-04 AND 04-05 AND THIS APPEAL CONCERNS ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03. 2. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, AT THE OUTSET SUBMITTED THAT SO FAR AS PENALTY FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 IS CONCERNE D, THE AMOUNT INVOLVED IS ` .3.00 LAKHS AND THE CBDT HAS ENHANCED THE FINANCIAL LIMIT FOR FILING OF APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL TO ` .3.00 LAKHS OF TAX EFFECT AGAINST THE EARLIER LIMIT OF ` .2.00 LAKHS AS PER CBDT INSTRUCTION NO.3 OF 2011 DATED 09 .02.2011, THEREFORE, THE APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT IS NOT MAINTAINABLE DUE TO LESS TAX EFFECT AND THE LD. DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, SUBMITTED THAT IN THIS FRESH CIRCULAR DATED 09.02.2011, THERE IS SPECIFIC STIPULATION [AS PER PARA 11 OF TH E INSTRUCTION] THAT THIS INSTRUCTION I.T.A. NO I.T.A. NO I.T.A. NO I.T.A. NOS SS S. .. .1 11 15 55 57/ 7/7/ 7/MDS/ MDS/ MDS/ MDS/1 11 10 00 0 2 SHALL APPLY TO APPEALS FILED ON OR AFTER 09.02.2011 AND EARLIER FILED APPEALS WILL BE GOVERNED BY EARLIER INSTRUCTIONS ON THIS SUBJECT , OPERATIVE WHEN SUCH APPEALS WERE FILED AND THE LD. DR HAS PLEADED THAT THE APPEAL MAY BE DECIDED ON MERITS. 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND MATERIA L ON RECORD. SO FAR AS THE OBJECTION OF THE LD. DR ABOUT NON-RETROSPECTIVI TY OF REVISED LIMIT OF TAX EFFECT IS CONCERNED, WE FIND THAT NO DOUBT IN THE CBDT INS TRUCTION NO.3/2011 DATED 09.02.2011, THERE IS CLEAR STIPULATION AS PER PARA 11 OF THE SAID INSTRUCTION THAT THESE INSTRUCTIONS WILL BE APPLICABLE TO THE APPEAL S FILED ON OR AFTER 09.02.2011. BUT SIMILAR TYPE OF STIPULATION WAS THERE IN INSTRU CTION NO.3 OF 2008 DATED 15.05.2008 IN CLAUSE 11 OF SAID INSTRUCTION AND MOR E THAN ONE HIGH COURTS ARE FOUND TO HAVE HELD THAT REVISED MONETARY LIMIT WOUL D APPLY TO ALL PENDING APPEALS AND MOREOVER, VARIOUS BENCHES OF ITAT CHENN AI HAVE CONSIDERED SIMILAR CASES AGAINST THE REVENUE AND OTHERWISE, TH E DEPARTMENT HAS NOT MADE OUT A CASE TO ESTABLISH THAT THE ISSUE FALLS W ITHIN THE EXCEPTIONS PROVIDED IN THE SAID CIRCULAR/ INSTRUCTION. 4. FURTHER IN THE CASE OF CIT V. ASSOCIATED AGENCIE S, CHENNAI-600 034 REPORTED IN 295 ITR 496, THE HONBLE MADRAS HIGH CO URT HAS HELD THAT APPEALS CANNOT BE FILED IN VIOLATION OF THE SAID CIRCULAR. THE HONBLE MADRAS HIGH COURT HAD ALSO REFERRED TO THE JUDGMENT OF HONBLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. DIGVIJAY SINGH REPORTED IN (2007) 2 92 ITR 314, THE JUDGMENT OF HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. ZO EB Y. TOPIWALS (2006) 284 ITR 379 AND ALSO ANOTHER JUDGMENT OF HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE I.T.A. NO I.T.A. NO I.T.A. NO I.T.A. NOS SS S. .. .1 11 15 55 57/ 7/7/ 7/MDS/ MDS/ MDS/ MDS/1 11 10 00 0 3 OF CIT VS. CAMCO COLOUR CO., (2002) 254 ITR 565 FOR THE PROPOSITION THAT DIRECTIONS ISSUED BY THE BOARD ARE BINDING ON THE D EPARTMENT AND APPEAL FILED WHERE THE TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN THAT PROVIDED IN THE SAID INSTRUCTION IS NOT MAINTAINABLE. 5 HENCE, IN VIEW OF THE SAID CIRCULAR AND RESPECTF ULLY FOLLOWING THE PRECEDENTS FROM HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT A S NOTED ABOVE, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED IN LIMINE. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISM ISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED SOON AFTER THE CONCLUSION OF HEAR ING ON 13.06.2011. SD/- SD/- (N.S. SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (U.B.S. BEDI) JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED, THE 13.06.2011 VM/- TO:THE ASSESSEE//A.O./CIT(A)/CIT/D.R.