The ITO, Ward-6(3), Ahmedabad V. M/s. Champaklal Maganlal Homeo Pharmacy, Ahmedabad

ITA 1768/AHD/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 130 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9585 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 6 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-01-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 10-01-2017
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 17-06-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: DIVYAKANT PARIKH HEARING CONCL
• Keywords: Additional evidence; Tax effect

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO. 1768 /AHD/201 3 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 0 8 - 09 PAGE 1 OF 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD B BENCH, AHMEDABAD [CORAM: PRAMOD KUMAR AM AND S S GODARA JM] I.T.A. NO. 1768 /AHD/201 3 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 0 8 - 09 INCOME TAX OFFICER , WARD 6(3), AHMEDABAD . ..... ............APPELLANT VS CHAMPAK LAL MAGANLAL HOMEO PHARMACY . .. ...........RESPONDENT 18, SUBHLAXMI ESTATE, VIRAMGAM ROAD, SANAND, AHMEDABAD 382 110 [PAN: AACFC 8374 K ] APPEARANCES BY JAMES KURIAN , FOR THE APPELLANT DIVYAKANT PARIKH FOR THE RESPONDENT HEARING CONCLUDED ON: 10 / 0 1 / 20 17 ORDER PRONOUNCED ON : 10 / 0 1 / 20 1 7 O R D E R PER PRAMOD KUMAR , AM: 1. BY WAY OF THIS APPEAL, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS CHALLENGED CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 0 1.04 .2013, PASSED BY THE L EARNED CIT(A) - XX , AHMEDABAD FOR THE ASSESSMENT Y EAR 20 0 8 - 09 , ON THE FOLLOWING GROUND S : - I ) T HE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN ADMITTING T H E ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES WHEN THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT PREVENTED BY SUFFICIENT CAUSE FROM PRODUCING THE EVIDENCES CALLED UPON TO PRODUCE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICE R, IN TERMS OF RULE 46A(C) OF THE L.T. RULES, 1962. II) T HE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF STCG ON ACCOUNT OF SALES CONSIDERATION OF LAND OF RS.51,89,77 5 / - U/S.50 OF THE I.T. ACT. MADE BY THE A.O. I.T.A. NO. 1768 /AHD/201 3 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 0 8 - 09 PAGE 2 OF 3 III) THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELETING THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF OUT OF EXPENSES OF RS.3,64,594/ - BEING 25% OF TOTAL EXPENSES OF RS.14,58,374/ - MADE BY THE A.O. IV) ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD . COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A) OU GHT TO HAVE UPHELD THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. V) IT IS, THEREFORE, PRAYED THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A) MAY BE SET - ASIDE AND THAT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER BE RESTORED. 2. WHEN THIS APPEAL WAS CALLED OUT FOR HEARING, L EARNED C OUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE POINTED OUT THAT, AS NOTED BY THE CI T(A) HIMSELF, THE TAX EFFECT IN VOLVED IN THIS APP E AL IS ONLY RS.8,58,156/ - I.E. LESS THAN RS.10 LAKHS, AND THAT, FOR THIS SHORT REASON ALONE, THE APPEAL SHOULD BE DISMISSED AS NON - MAINTAIN ABLE. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THIS LINE OF ARGUMENT, LEARNED C OUNSEL SUBMITS THAT HE HAS REASONABLE GROUNDS TO SUCCEED ON MERITS AS WELL. HOWEVER, FOR THE REASON WE WILL SET OUT IN A SHORT WHILE, WE DO NOT CONSIDER IT NECESSARY TO DEAL WITH MERITS OF THE MA TTER. 3. LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FAIRLY ACCEPTS THAT TAX EFFECT DOES NOT EXCEED RS.10 LAKHS. 4 . WE HAVE NOTICED THAT THE TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IS LESS THAN RS.10,00,000/ - . IN VIEW OF THIS UNDISPUTED FACT AND IN THE LIGHT OF CBDT CIRCULAR NO.21/2015 DATED 10 TH DECEMBER, 2015, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THIS APPEAL IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN FOR THE SIMPLE REASON THAT TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN THE APPEAL IS LESS THAN RS.10,00,000/ - . 5 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 10 TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2017 . SD/ - SD/ - S S GODARA PRAMOD KUMAR (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) DATED: 10 TH DAY OF JANUARY, 201 7 . I.T.A. NO. 1768 /AHD/201 3 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 0 8 - 09 PAGE 3 OF 3 COPIE S TO : (1) THE APPELLANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) DR (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCHES, AHMEDABAD