DCIT, New Delhi V. M/s Anjali Leasing Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 2437/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7024 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-10-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 2
• Next Hearing Date: 19-09-2016
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 02-05-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Capital asset; Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH SMC, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 2437/DEL/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012-13 DCIT, CIRCLE 2(2), VS. M/S ANJALI LEASING LT D., ROOM NO. 392, CR BUILDING, 527, KUTCHA PATI RA, IP ESTATE, NEW DELHI 2 SITA RAM BAZAR DELHI 110 006 (PAN: AAACA1798A) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SH. NK BANSAL, SR. DR RESPONDENT BY : NONE DATE OF HEARING : 19-09-2016 DATE OF ORDER : 04-10-2016 ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, J.M. THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT IS DIRECTED AG AINST THE ORDER DATED 3.2.2016 OF LD. CIT(A)-I, NEW DELHI PERTAINING TO A SSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13. 2. THE GROUND RAISED IN THE APPEAL READS AS UNDER:- 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DIRECTING THE AO TO TREAT THE S ALE OF PROPERTY AS SALE OF INVESTMENT/ CAPITAL ASSET, AS AGAINST BUSI NESS INCOME. 2. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE FOR RESERVING THE RI GHT TO AMEND, MODIFY, ALTER, ADD OR FOREGO ANY GROUND(S) OF APPEA L AT ANY TIME BEFORE OR DURING THE HEARING OF THIS APPEAL. 3. IN THIS CASE, NOTICE OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE WAS SENT BY THE REGISTERED AD POST, IN SPITE OF THE SAME, ASSESSEE, NOR HIS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE APPEARED TO PROSECUTE THE MATTER IN DISPUTE, NOR FILED ANY APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT. KEEPING IN VIEW THE F ACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PRESENT CASE AND THE ISSUE INV OLVED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL, I AM OF THE VIEW THAT NO USEFUL PURPOSE WOU LD BE SERVED TO ISSUE 2 NOTICE AGAIN AND AGAIN TO THE ASSESSEE, THEREFORE, I AM DECIDING THE PRESENT APPEAL EXPARTE QUA ASSESSEE, AFTER HEARING THE LD. DR AND PERUSING THE RECORDS. 4. I HAVE HEARD THE LD. DR AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. AT THE THRESHOLD, I FIND THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN THE REVENU E APPEALS IS LESS THAN RS.10,00,000/-, THEREFORE, THE DEPARTMENTS APPEAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE, IN VIEW OF THE CIRCULAR NO. 21/2015 DATED 10 TH DECEMBER, 2015 ISSUED VIDE F.NO. 279/MISC. 142/2007-ITJ (PT.) BY THE CBDT. FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, THE RELEVANT PARA NOS. 3 & 10 OF THE AFORESAID CBDTS C IRCULAR ARE REPRODUCED AS UNDER:- 3. HENCEFORTH, APPEALS/ SLPS SHALL NOT BE FILED IN CASES WHERE THE TAX EFFECT DOES NOT EXCEED THE MONETARY L IMITS GIVEN HEREUNDER: S NO APPEALS IN INCOME-TAX MATTERS 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 CASES IS TO BE DECIDED ON MERITS OF THE 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 WITHDRAWN/ NOT PRESSED. APPEALS BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT WILL BE GOVERNED BY THE INSTRUCTI ONS ON THIS SUBJECT, OPERATIVE AT THE TIME WHEN SUCH APPEA L WAS FILED. 3 5. IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE THAT THE BOARDS INSTRUCTIO N OR DIRECTIONS ISSUED TO THE INCOME-TAX AUTHORITIES ARE BINDING ON THOSE AUTHORI TIES, THEREFORE, THE DEPARTMENT SHOULD HAVE WITHDRAWN/ NOT PRESSED THE P RESENT APPEAL, IN VIEW OF THE AFORESAID INSTRUCTIONS SINCE THE TAX EFFECT IN THE INSTANT APPEAL IS LESS THAN THE AMOUNT OF RS. 10 LACS, PRESCRIBED IN THE ABOVE SAID CBDTS INSTRUCTIONS. 6. KEEPING IN VIEW THE CBDT INSTRUCTION NO. 21/2015 DATED 10 TH DECEMBER, 2015, I AM OF THE VIEW THAT THE REVENUE SHOULD HAVE WITHDRAWN/ NOT PRESSED THE INSTANT APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. I AM ALSO OF THE VIEW THAT THE SAID INSTRUCTIONS ARE APPLICABLE FOR THE PENDING APPEALS AND APPEALS TO BE FILED HENCEFORTH IN TRIBUNAL. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE STAND DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 04/10/2016. SD/- (H.S. SIDHU) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 04/10/2016 *SR BHATNAGAR* COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR