ACIT, New Delhi V. Shri Vijay Pal Garg, Delhi

ITA 2868/DEL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7109 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-02-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Next Hearing Date: 08-02-2016
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 09-05-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K JAIN
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH H, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 2868/DEL/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. SH. VIJAY PAL GARG, CENTRAL CIRCLE-5 TU-70, PITAMPURA, ROOM NO. 361, DELHI 88 3 RD FLOOR, ARA CENTRE, JHANDEWALAN EXTN., NEW DELHI (PAN:ADQPG3144E) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) AND CROSS OBJECTION NO. 69/DEL/2014 (IN ITA NO. 2868/DEL/2013) ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 SH. VIJAY PAL GARG, VS. ACIT, CC-5, TU-70, PITAMPURA, NEW DELHI DELHI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) DEPARTMENT BY : SH. S.K. JAIN, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SH. GAUTAM JAIN, CA DATE OF HEARING : 08-02-2016 DATE OF ORDER : 08-02-2016 ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, J.M. THE DEPARTMENT HAS FILED THIS APPEAL AND ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE CROSS OBJECTION WHICH IS EMANATE FROM THE ORDER DATED 19.2.2013 OF LD. CIT(A)-XXXI, NEW DELHI PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. THE GROUNDS RAISED IN THE REVENUES APPEAL READS AS UNDER:- 1. THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) IS NOT CORRECT IN LAW AND FACTS. ITA NO.2868/DEL/2013 & CO NO. 69/DEL/2014 2 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AS WELL AS IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE DISALLOWANCE OF EX PENSES FOR PERSONAL USE OF RS. 22,759/-. 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AS WELL AS IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELE TING THE ADDITION OF RS. 10,00,000/- MADE U/S. 68 OF UNSECURED LOAN RECEIV ED. 4. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, AMEND ANY / A LL THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE OR DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING OF THE APPEA L. 2. WE FIND THAT REVENUE IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL BE FORE THE TRIBUNAL HAS CHALLENGED THE DELETION OF ADDITION OF RS. 22,759/ - VIDE GROUND NO. 1 AND RS. 10,00,000/- VIDE GROUND NO. 2, AS AFORESAID. 3. FROM THE ABOVE, WE FIND THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN THE REVENUES APPEAL 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. 142/200 7- ITJ (PT.) BY THE CBDT. FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE , THE RELEVANT PARA NOS. 3 & 10 OF THE AFORESAID CBDTS CIRCULAR ARE REPRODUCED AS UNDER:- 3. HENCEFORTH, APPEALS/ SLPS SHALL NOT BE FILED IN CASES WHERE THE TAX EFFECT DOES NOT EXCEED THE MONETARY LIMITS GIVEN HE REUNDER: S NO APPEALS IN INCOME -TAX MATTERS MONETARY LIMIT (IN RS) 1 BEFORE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 10,00,000/- 2 BEFORE HIGH COU RT 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 MONETARY LIMITS PRESCR IBED 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/ TRIB UNALS. PENDING APPEALS BELOW THE SPECIFIED TAX LIMITS IN PARA 3 AB OVE MAY BE WITHDRAWN/ 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. ITA NO.2868/DEL/2013 & CO NO. 69/DEL/2014 3 4. IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE THAT THE BOARDS INSTRUCTIO N OR DIRECTIONS ISSUED TO THE INCOME- TAX AUTHORITIES ARE BINDING ON THOSE AUTHORITIES, T HEREFORE, THE DEPARTMENT SHOULD HAVE WITHDRAWN/ NOT PRESSED THE PRESENT APPEAL, IN VIEW OF THE AFORESAID INSTRUCTIONS SINCE THE TAX EFFECT IN THE INSTANT APPEAL IS LESS THAN THE A MOUNT OF RS. 10 LACS, PRESCRIBED IN THE ABOVE SAID CBDTS INSTRUCTIONS. 5. KEEPING IN VIEW THE CBDT INSTRUCTION NO. 21/2015 DATED 10 TH DECEMBER, 2015, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE REVENUE SHOULD HAVE WIT HDRAWN/ NOT PRESSED THE INSTANT APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. WE ARE ALSO OF THE VIE W THAT THE SAID INSTRUCTIONS ARE APPLICABLE FOR THE PENDING APPEALS AND APPEALS TO B E FILED HENCEFORTH IN TRIBUNAL. ACCORDINGLY, THE REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ASSESSEES CROSS OBJECTION 6. AS FAR AS ASSESSEES CROSS OBJECTION IS CONCERNE D, THE SAME IS ONLY SUPPORTIVE THE LD. CIT(A)S ORDER. SINCE WE HAVE DISMISSED THE APP EAL OF THE REVENUE AS AFORESAID, HENCE, THE CROSS OBJECTION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE HA S BECOME INFRUCTUOUS AND DISMISSED AS SUCH. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE REVENUES APPEAL AS WELL AS ASSESSEES CROSS OBJECTION STAND DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 08/02/2016. SD/- SD/- (L.P. SAHU) (H.S. SIDHU) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDIC IAL MEMBER DATED: 08/2/2016 *SR BHATNAGAR* COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR