ACIT, New Delhi V. Dewan Chand, New Delhi

ITA 2293/DEL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 112 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5531 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 6 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-11-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 17-04-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASHIMA NEB
• Keywords: Retrospective amendment; Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: B NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGARWAL, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI K.NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.2293/DEL/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE 62(1), NEW DELHI VS DEWAN CHAND, S-11, GREATER KAILASH-II, NEW DELHI PAN: AAIFM0046J APPELLANT RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY NONE REVENUE BY MS ASHIMA NEB, SR. DR ORDER PER K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JM THE PRESENT APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 13.2.2015 IN APPEAL NO.89/2013-14 PASSED BY THE LEARNED DATE OF HEARING 05.11.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 05.11.2018 2 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS)-XX, NEW DELHI {CIT(A)} IN RELATION TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. 2. AT THE OUTSET, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS NOT MAINTAINABLE AS THE TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN THIS CASE IS LESS THAN RS.20 LACS. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES. IT IS FOUND THAT PURSUANT TO THE MANDATE OF SECTION 268A, THE CBDT HAS ISSUED CIRCULAR NO. 03 OF 2018, DATED 11TH JULY, 2018 WITH RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT, REVISING THE MONETARY LIMIT TO RS.20,00,000/- FOR NOT FILING APPEALS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. IT IS FURTHER FOUND THAT AS THE TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN THE INSTANT APPEAL IS LESS THAN RS.20,00,000/-, THE EXTANT APPEAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE. THE LD. D.R., ALTHOUGH SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, BUT COULD NOT CONTROVERT THE FACT THAT TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IS LESS THAN RS.20,00,000/-. 4. GOING BY THE PRESCRIPTION OF THE AFORENOTED CIRCULAR, IT IS PALPABLE THAT THE INSTRUCTION IS APPLICABLE TO THE PENDING APPEALS ALSO WITH RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT AND THERE IS A CLEAR-CUT DIRECTION TO THE DEPARTMENT TO WITHDRAW OR NOT PRESS SUCH APPEALS FILED BEFORE THE ITAT, WHEREIN TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN RS.20,00,000/-. WE ARE, THEREFORE, OF THE VIEW THAT THE REVENUE SHOULD HAVE EITHER NOT FILED THE INSTANT APPEALS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL OR WITHDRAWN THE SAME AS THE TAX EFFECT IN THIS CASE 3 IS ADMITTEDLY LESS THAN THE PRESCRIBED LIMIT, I.E., RS. 20,00,000/- FOR NOT FILING THE APPEAL. ACCORDINGLY, WE DISMISS THE INSTANT APPEAL WITHOUT GOING INTO MERITS OF THE CASE. 5. THE LD. DR HAS BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE A LETTER DATED 20.08.2018 OF THE DIRECTOR (ITJ), CBDT, NEW DELHI ADDRESSED TO ALL THE PRINCIPAL CCITS IN WHICH PARA NO. 10 OF THE EARLIER CIRCULAR DATED 11.7.2018, ENUMERATING CERTAIN INSTANCES IN WHICH THE APPEALS SHOULD BE CONTESTED NOTWITHSTANDING THE LOW TAX EFFECT, HAS BEEN REVISED. HE, HOWEVER, COULD NOT PLACE ANY MATERIAL ON RECORD TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THE ABOVE APPEAL IS COVERED BY THE AMENDED PARA OF THE CIRCULAR. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE DISMISS THE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE AND GIVE LIBERTY TO THE DEPARTMENT TO FILE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS, IF IT IS FOUND THAT EITHER THE TAX EFFECT IS MORE THAN THE PRESCRIBED LIMIT OF RS.20,00,000/- OR THE APPEALS GETS COVERED IN THE REVISED PARA 10 OF THE LETTER DATED 20.08.2018. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE STANDS DISMISSED. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 5TH NOVEMBER, 2018. SD/- SD/- (G.D. AGARWAL) (K. NARASIMHA CHARY) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 5TH NOVEMBER, 2018 4 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI DRAFT DICTATED ON 05.11.2018 DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR .05.11.2018 DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON DATE OF UPLOADING ORDER ON THE WEBSITE FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE AR DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER.