The ITO, Ward-2(3), Baroda V. M/s. K.K.Engineering Corporation, Baroda

ITA 2583/AHD/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0827 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 9 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-08-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 03-08-2016
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 01-11-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: JIMMY PATEL
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO . 2 583 /AHD/201 3 A SSESSMENT Y EAR: 20 0 9 - 10 PAGE 1 OF 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH, SMC , AHMEDABAD [CORAM: PRAMOD KUMAR AM] I.T.A. NO. 2583 /AHD/ 20 1 3 ASSESSMENT Y EAR : 20 0 9 - 10 INCOME TAX OFFICER , WARD 2 ( 3 ), BARODA. ....... ............ . APPELLANT VS . K.K. ENGINEERING CORPORATION, . ...... . ... . RESPONDENT 221, PARADISE COMPLEX, SAYAJIGUNJ, BARODA. [ PAN: A ADFK 9816 F ] APPEARANCES BY: SATISH SOLANKI, FOR THE APPELLANT JIMMY PATEL , FOR THE RESPONDENT D ATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : AUGUST 4 TH , 201 6 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : AUGUST 8 TH , 201 6 O R D E R 1. BY WAY OF THIS APPEAL, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS CHALLENGED CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 26.07.2013 , PASSED BY THE L EARNED CIT(A), FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 0 9 - 10 , ON T HE FOLLOWING GROUND S : - 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT (APPEAL) ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.15,05,423/ - UNDER SECTION 40(A)(IA) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, HOLDING THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 40( A)(IA) AS AMENDED BY THE FINANCE ACT, 2010 W.E.F. 01.04.2010, ARE OF CLARIFICATORY IN NATURE AND, THEREFORE, RETROSPECTIVE. 2. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) ERRED IN NOT CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE MEMORANDUM EXPLAINING THE PROVI SIONS IN FIAN CE BILL, 2010 CLEA RLY STATE THAT THIS AMENDMENT I S PROPOSED TO T AKE EFFECT FROM 01.04.2010 AND WILL, ACCORDINGLY, APPLY IN RELATION TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010 - 11 AND SUBSEQUENT YEARS. 2. I 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 I.T.A. NO . 2 583 /AHD/201 3 A SSESSMENT Y EAR: 20 0 9 - 10 PAGE 2 OF 2 NO.21/2015 DATED 10 TH DECEMBER, 2015, I AM OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THIS APPEAL IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN FOR THE SIMPLE REASON THAT TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN THE APPEAL IS LESS THAN RS.10,00,000/ - . 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 8 TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2016. SD/ - PRAMOD KUMAR (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) DATED: THE 8 TH DAY OF AUGUST , 2016. PBN/* COPIES 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 AH MEDABAD BENCHES, AHMEDABAD