DCIT, New Delhi V. M/s Shonkh Technologies Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 179/DEL/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6459 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 year(s) 1 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-03-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 10-03-2016
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 16-01-2009
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KARTAR SINGH CITA
• Keywords: Retrospective amendment; Tax effect
• Section: 12A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: F NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEM BER AND SHRI LALIT KUMAR, J UDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A .NO. 179/DEL/2009 (ASSESSM ENT YEAR-2001-02) DCIT, CIRCLE 8(1) ROOM NO. 163 C. R. BUILDING, NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) VS M/S SONKH TECHNOLOGIES LTD. BASEMENT 17-A, SANT NAGAR EAST OF KAILASH NEW DELHI (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SH. KARTAR SINGH CIT(A) (DR) RESPONDENT BY NONE ORDER PER LALIT KUMAR, JM THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE DEPARTMENT AGAINST THE ORD ER DATED 15/10/2008 OF LD. CIT (A)-XI, NEW DELHI. 2. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LEARNED COUNSE L FOR THE ASSESSEE AT THE VERY OUTSET STATED THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN THIS APPEAL IS LESS THAN RS.10,00,000/-, THEREFO RE, THE DATE OF HEARING 10.03.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 11.03.2016 DEPARTMENT OUGHT NOT TO HAVE FILED THIS APPEAL IN V IEW OF THE CIRCULAR ISSUED BY THE CBDT AND THE PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN SECTION 268A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 19 61 (HEREINAFTER TO BE REFERRED AS THE ACT). 3. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. D.R., ALTHOUGH SUPPOR TED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, BUT COULD NOT CONTROVERT THIS FACT THAT TAX EFFECT IN THIS APPEAL IS LESS THAN RS.10,00,000/-. 4. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PA RTIES AND THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD, IT IS NOTICED THAT SECTION 268A HAS BEEN INSERTED BY THE FINANCE ACT, 2008 WITH RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT FROM 01/04/99. THE SAID S ECTION 268 OF THE ACT PROVIDES THAT THE BOARD MAY ISSUE IN STRUCTION OR DIRECTIONS TO THE OTHER INCOME-TAX AUTHORITIES F IXING MONETARY LIMITS FOR NOT FILING THE APPEALS BEFORE T HE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL OR THE COURTS, SAID INSTRUCTIONS/DIRECTIONS ARE BINDING ON THE INCOME T AX AUTHORITIES. 5. IT IS NOTICED THAT THE CBDT HAS ISSUED CIRCULAR NO.21 OF 2015 DATED 10.12.2015, VIDE WHICH IT HAS REVISED TH E MONETARY LIMIT TO RS.10,00,000/- FOR NOT FILING TH E APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE SA ID CIRCULAR READS AS UNDER: .. ... 3. HENCEFORTH, APPEALS/ SLPS SHALL NOT BE FILED IN CASES WHERE THE TAX EFFECT DOES NOT EXCEED THE MONETARY LIMITS GIVEN HEREUNDER: S. NO APPEALS IN INCOME -TAX MATTER MONETARY LIMIT (IN RS) 1 BEFORE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 10,00,000/- 2 BEFORE HIGH COURT 20,00,000/- 3 BEFORE SUPREME COURT 25,00,000/- IT IS CLARIFIED THAT AN APPEAL SHOULD NOT BE FILED MERELY BECAUSE THE TAX EFFECT IN A CASE EXCEEDS THE MONETA RY LIMITS PRESCRIBED ABOVE. FILING OF APPEAL IN SUCH C ASES IS TO BE DECIDED ON MERITS OF THE CASE. 9. THE MONETARY LIMITS SPECIFIED IN PARA 3 ABOVE SHALL NOT APPLY TO WRIT MATTERS AND DIRECT TAX MATT ERS OTHER THAN INCOME TAX. FILING OF APPEALS IN OTHER D IRECT TAX MATTERS SHALL CONTINUE TO BE GOVERNED BY RELEVA NT PROVISIONS OF STATUTE & RULES. FURTHER, FILING OF A PPEAL IN CASES OF INCOME TAX, WHERE THE TAX EFFECT IS NOT QUANTIFIABLE OR NOT INVOLVED, SUCH AS THE CASE OF REGISTRATION OF TRUSTS OR INSTITUTIONS UNDER SECTIO N 12A OF THE IT ACT, 1961, SHALL NOT BE GOVERNED BY T HE LIMITS SPECIFIED IN PARA 3 ABOVE AND DECISION TO F ILE APPEAL IN SUCH CASES MAY BE TAKEN ON MERITS OF A PARTICULAR CASE. 10. THIS INSTRUCTION WILL APPLY RETROSPECTIVELY TO PENDING APPEALS AND APPEALS TO BE FILED HENCEFORTH IN HIGH COURTS/ TRIBUNALS. PENDING APPEALS BELOW THE SPECIFIED TAX LIMITS IN PARA 3 ABOVE MAY BE WITHDRA WN/ NOT PRESSED. APPEALS BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT WILL BE GOVERNED BY THE INSTRUCTIONS ON THIS SUBJECT, OPERA TIVE AT THE TIME WHEN SUCH APPEAL WAS FILED. 6. FROM CLAUSE 10 OF THE ABOVE SAID CIRCULAR IT IS CLEAR THAT THESE INSTRUCTIONS ARE APPLICABLE TO THE PENDI NG APPEALS ALSO AND AS PER CLAUSE 3, THERE IS CLEAR CU T INSTRUCTION TO THE DEPARTMENT TO WITHDRAW OR NOT TO PRESS THE APPEALS FILED BEFORE THE ITAT WHEREIN TAX EFFEC T IS LESS THAN RS.10,00,000/-. THESE INSTRUCTIONS ARE OPERATI VE RETROSPECTIVELY TO THE PENDING APPEALS. 7. KEEPING IN VIEW THE CBDT CIRCULAR NO.21 OF 2015 DATED 10.12.2015 AND ALSO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 268A OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE R EVENUE SHOULD NOT HAVE FILED THE INSTANT APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 8. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WITHOUT GOING INTO MERITS OF THE CASE, WE DISMISS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT . 9. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT IS DISMI SSED. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 11/03/2016) THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON OF MARCH, 2016. SD/- SD/- (J. SUDHAKAR REDDY) (LALIT KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMB ER DATED: 11/03/2016 R. NAHEED * COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTR AR ITAT NEW DELHI DATE 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 11/03/2016 PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 11/03/2016 PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER .2016 JM/AM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER. JM/AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS 11.03.2016 PS/PS 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK 11.03.2016 PS 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE AR 9. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK. 10. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER.