The ACIT, Central Circle-1, Baroda V. M/s. Diamond Power Transformers Ltd., Baroda

ITA 1758/AHD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9328 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 6 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-02-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 11-02-2016
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 08-08-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: J P JANGID
• Assessee Lawyers: ROHAN POPAT AR
• Keywords: Depreciation; Audit objection; Tax effect

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, AHMEDABAD , , BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A. NO. 1758/AHD/2012 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10) THE ASST.CIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-I, BARODA / VS. M/S.DIAMOND POWER TRANSFORMERS LTD. 101-B-7, GIDC ESTATE, ROAD NO.2, RANOLI, BARODA-390 350 ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AACCD 8505 E ( ' / APPELLANT ) .. ( #' / RESPONDENT ) ' $ / APPELLANT BY : SHRI J.P. JANGID, SR.DR #' % $ / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI ROHAN POPAT, AR &'( % ) / DATE OF HEARING 11/02/2016 *+, % ) / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 16/02/2016 / O R D E R PER SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE LD.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-I, BARODA [CIT(A) IN SHORT] DATED 15/05/2012 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR (AY) 2009-10. THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL :- ITA NO.1758 /AH D/2012 ACIT VS. M/S.DIAMOND POWER TRANSFORMERS LTD. ASST.YEAR 2009-10 - 2 - 1. THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON F ACTS IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.9,31,292/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF D ISALLOWANCE IN RESPECT OF DEPRECIATION, INSURANCE OF MOTOR CAR AND INTEREST ON CAR LOAN. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD.CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE UPHELD THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFF ICER ON THE ABOVE POINT. IT IS THEREFORE PRAYED THAT THE ORDER OF THE LEARNE D CIT(A) BE SET ASIDE AND THAT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER BE RESTORED TO TH E ABOVE EXTENT. 2. AT THE OUTSET, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSE SSEE CONTENDED THAT AS PER CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES CIRCULAR NO. 2 1/2015 IN F.NO.279/MISC. 142/2007-ITJ (PT) DATED 10TH DECEMBE R 2015, THE REVISED LIMIT FOR PREFERRING REVENUE'S APPEALS IS R S. 10 LACS. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE TOTAL TAX LIABILITY IN THE PRESE NT REVENUE'S APPEAL IS RS.3,16,546/- WHICH IS BELOW THE PRESCRIBED LIMIT O F RS. 10 LACS. HE HAS ALSO SUBMITTED A WORKING OF LOW TAX EFFECT WHICH IS REPRODUCED HEREUNDER:- PARTICULARS AMOUNT RS. TOTAL INCOME AS ASSESSED BY THE AO (A) 5,98,05,050 LESS : RELIEF GRANTED BY CIT(A), FOR WHICH THE DEPT. IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE HONBLE ITAT - (B) 9,31,292 DIFFERENCE (C) 5,88,73,758 TAX ON (A) 2,03,27,736 LESS : TAX ON (C) 2,00,11,190 DIFFERENCE, BEING THE TAX EFFECT INVOLVED 3,16,546 ITA NO.1758 /AH D/2012 ACIT VS. M/S.DIAMOND POWER TRANSFORMERS LTD. ASST.YEAR 2009-10 - 3 - 2.1. THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, THEREFORE, PLEADED THAT IN VIEW OF THE CBDT CIRCULAR, THE REVENUE'S APPEAL MAY BE DISM ISSED AS THE TAX EFFECT BEING BELOW THE PRESCRIBED LIMIT. 3. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE COULD NOT CO NTROVERT THE AFORESAID SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE AS SESSEE. 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES AND PERUSED THE MAT ERIAL PLACED BEFORE US. WE FIND THAT THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS NOT MAINTAINABLE IN VIEW OF CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 21/2015 IN F.NO.279/MISC. 142/2007-ITJ (PT) DATED 10TH DECEMBER 2015, VIDE WHICH IT HAS BE EN PROVIDED THAT IF THE TAX EFFECT BY VIRTUE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INC OME-TAX (APPEALS)S ORDER IS BELOW RS. 10 LAKHS, THEN THAT ORDER WOULD NOT BE CHALLENGED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL IN FURTHER APPEAL. THE BOARD H AS PROVIDED EXEMPTIONS AT CLAUSE (8) OF THE INSTRUCTIONS WHEREI N IT HAS BEEN PROVIDED THAT THESE INSTRUCTIONS WILL NOT BE APPLICABLE, IF VIRES OF ANY PROVISIONS HAS BEEN QUASHED BY IMPUGNED ORDER OR ADDITION WAS MADE ON SOME AUDIT OBJECTIONS OR THE ADDITION RELATES TO UNDISCL OSED FOREIGN ASSETS/BANK ACCOUNTS, ETC. WE FIND THAT THE PRESENT CASE DOES NOT FALL WITHIN THE EXEMPTION CLAUSE AND THE TAX IS LESS THAN RS. 10 LA KHS. THEREFORE, THE PRESENT APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS NOT MAINTAINABLE A ND HENCE DISMISSED. ITA NO.1758 /AH D/2012 ACIT VS. M/S.DIAMOND POWER TRANSFORMERS LTD. ASST.YEAR 2009-10 - 4 - 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE I S DISMISSED IN LIMINE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON TUESDAY, THE 16 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2016 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- SD/- ( ) ( ) ( PRAMOD KUMAR ) ( KUL BHARAT ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 16/ 02 /2016 0)..& , '.&../ T.C. NAIR, SR. PS !'#$%&%# / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. ' / THE APPELLANT 2. #' / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 123 4 / CONCERNED CIT 4. 4 ( ) / THE CIT(A)-I, BARODA 5. 5'6 &23 , ) 23 , , 1 / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. 689 :( / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, #5 //TRUE COPY// / ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION .. 15.2.16 (TAX EFFECT BELOW TE N LACS COPIED MATTER) 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER .. 15.2.16 3. OTHER MEMBER... 4. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.P. S./P.S.. 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE D ICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR.P .S./P.S .16.2.16 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK 16.2.16 8. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK ... 9. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER.. 10. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER