I.T.O Wd - 51(4),kolkata., Kolkata V. Rahul Jain., Kolkata

ITA 177/KOL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3457 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 11 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-01-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 23-01-2013
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: VARSHA JALAN
• Keywords: Tax effect
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH: K OLKATA [BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM & SHRI WASEEM AHMED , AM] I.T.A NO.177/KOL/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WD-51(4), KOLKATA. VS. RAHUL JAIN (PAN: ACVPJ8849F) ( APPELLANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) DATE OF HEARING: 22.01.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 22.01.2016 FOR THE APPELLANT: SHRI SANJAY MUKHERJEE, JCIT FOR THE RESPONDENT: MS. VARSHA JALAN, ADVOCATE ORDER PER SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM: THIS APPEAL BY REVENUE IS ARISING OUT OF ORDER OF C IT(A)-XXXII, KOLKATA VIDE APPEAL NO. 101/XXXII/10-11/51(4)/KOL DATED 06.11.2012. ASSESS MENT WAS FRAMED BY ITO, WD-51(4), KOLKATA U/S. 143(3) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REF ERRED TO AS THE ACT) FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 VIDE HIS ORDER DATED 27.12.2010. 2. AT THE OUTSET, IT IS SEEN THAT THE QUANTUM INVO LVED IN THIS CASE IS RS.14,40,874/-AND TAX EFFECT O N THE DISPUTED ADDITION BEFORE US IS RS.4,45,230/-, W HICH IS LESS THAN RS. 10 LACS. 3. AFTER PERUSING THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECOR D, WE FIND THAT THE ADDITIONS DISPUTED BEFORE US IS BELOW THE TAX EFFECT LIMIT PRESCRIBED BY CBDT VIDE CIRCULAR NO. 21 / 2015 DATED 10.12.2015 FOR PREFERRING APPEALS BEFORE TRIBUNAL BY THE REVENUE. ON PERUSAL OF THE CIRCULAR NO. 21 / 2015 DATED 10.12.2015 AND THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD, L D. DR COULD NOT POINT OUT WHETHER THIS CASE FALLS UNDER ANY OF THE EXCEPTION AS PROVIDED IN THE CIRCU LAR DESPITE SPECIFIC OPPORTUNITY WAS GIVEN, DOES NO T FALL UNDER ANY OF THE EXCEPTIONS CONTEMPLATED IN TH E SAID CIRCULAR, AS THIS IS COVERED. WE ALSO FIND THAT THE CIRCULAR MAKES IT VERY CLEAR THAT THE REVISED M ONETARY LIMITS SHALL APPLY RETROSPECTIVELY TO PENDI NG APPEALS ALSO. WE FIND THAT THE CIRCULAR IS BINDING ON THE TAX AUTHORITIES. THIS POSITION HAS BEEN CONFIRMED BY THE HONBLE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF COMMISSIONER OF C USTOMS VS INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD REPORTED IN 267 ITR 272 (SC). HENCE, WE HOLD THAT THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE DESE RVES TO BE DISMISSED IN TERMS OF LOW TAX EFFECT VIDE CIR CULAR NO.21 / 2015 DATED 10.12.2015. ACCORDINGLY, THIS BEING A LOW TAX EFFECT CASE, WE DISMISS THIS A PPEAL OF REVENUE IN LIMINE, AS UNADMITTED, WITHOUT GOING INTO THE MERITS OF THE CASE. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISM ISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (WASEEM AHMED) (MAHAVIR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 22ND JANUARY, 2016 JD. SR. P.S 2 ITA NO.177/KOL/2013 RAHUL JAIN, AY 2008-09 2 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT ITO, WARD-51(4), KOLKATA. 2. RESPONDENT SHRI RAHUL JAIN, HB-89, SALT LAKE CITY , KOLKATA-700091. 3. CIT(A), KOLKATA 4. CIT , KOLKATA 5. DR, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA / TRUE COPY, BY ORDER, ASSTT. REGISTRAR .