The ITO, Ward-2, Anand V. M/s. Indian Packaging Products, Anand

ITA 273/AHD/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 101 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9568 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-07-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 08-11-2023
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 30-01-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: A.L THA KKA R
• Keywords: Tax effect; Tax effect
• Section: 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “B” BENCH Before: Sri D.K Tyagi, Judicial Member and Shri T.R. Meena, Accountant Member Inco me-tax Office r, Ward-2, Anand (Appellant) Vs M/s Indian Packaging Products, At Jitodia, Dist. Anand PAN: AAAFI7051H (Respondent) Revenue by: Sri P.L. Kure el, Sr .D.R. Assessee by: Sri A.L . Tha kka r, A. R. Date of hea ring : 08-07-2013 Date of pronounce ment : 08-07-2013 आदेश आदेशआदेश आदेश/ORDER PER : D.K. TYAGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- This is the revenue’s appeal against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-IV, Baroda dated 29-11-2012. 2. Effective grounds raised in this appeal read as under:- ITA No. 273/Ahd/2013 Assessment Year 2005-06 I.T.A No. 273 /Ahd/2013 A.Y. 2005-06 Page No ITO vs. M/s Packaging Products 2 “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) erred in quashing the re-assessment proceedings initiated in pursuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act without appreciating the fact that as per provisions of section 292BB, the assessee shall be precluded from taking any objection in any proceedings of inquiry under this Act if the notice has been served upon him in time and in accordance the provisions of the Income-tax Act, whereas, in the instant case, the assessee has not raised any such objection before the completion of the re-assessment proceedings. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that it is not a case where the AO has completed the re-assessment after obtaining sanction u/s 151(1) from a lower higher authority than prescribed by the Act but sanction has been obtained by the AO from a higher authority than prescribed by the Act.” 3. At the time of hearing learned counsel of the assessee at the outset submitted that tax effect in revenue’s appeal being less than 3 lacs, the Department should not have filed this appeal in view of CBDT Instruction No. 3/2011 dated 09-02-2011. Therefore, the appeal filed by the Revenue may kindly be dismissed in limine. Ld. D.R. on the other hand relied on the order of Ld. CIT(A). He however did not dispute the fact that tax effect in revenue’s appeal was less than Rs. 3 lacs. 4. After hearing both the parties and perusing the record, we find that that there is no dispute about the fact that tax effect in Revenue’s appeal is less than 3 lacs, therefore in view of CBDT Instruction No. 3/2011 dated 09- 02-2011, the Department should not have filed this appeal before us and the same is hereby dismissed in limine. I.T.A No. 273 /Ahd/2013 A.Y. 2005-06 Page No ITO vs. M/s Packaging Products 3 5. In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in open court on the date mentioned hereinabove at caption page Sd/- Sd/- (T.R. MEENA) ( D.K. TYAGI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad : Dated 08/07/2013 ak आदेश आदेशआदेश आदेश क क क क ूितिल प ूितिल पूितिल प ूितिल प अमे षत अमे षतअमे षत अमे षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. अपीलाथ / Appellant 2. ू यथ / Respondent 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु - अपील / CIT (A) 5. वभागीय ूितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड% फाइल / Guard file. By order/आदेश से, उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद