ACIT Central Circle 2(4), CHENNAI V. M.V.Muthuramalingam, CHENNAI

ITA 3143/CHNY/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3031 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-08-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 22-12-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R CLEMENT RAMESH KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: G BASKAR
• Keywords: Audit objection; Tax effect

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , . !' , $ % BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.3143/CHNY/2017 ' (' / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), CHENNAI - 600 034. V. SHRI M.V. MUTHURAMALINGAM, NO.21-A, T.S. KRISHNA NAGAR, MOGAPPAIR, CHENNAI - 600 037. PAN : AAKPM 0400 G (*+/ APPELLANT) (,-*+/ RESPONDENT) *+ . / / APPELLANT BY : SHRI R. CLEMENT RAMESH KUMAR, JCIT ,-*+ . / / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI G. BASKAR, ADVOCATE 0 . 1$ / DATE OF HEARING : 13.08.2018 2!( . 1$ / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13.08.2018 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) -18, CHENN AI, DATED 05.09.2017 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. 2. WE HEARD SHRI R. CLEMENT RAMESH KUMAR, THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND SHRI G. BASKAR, THE LD.COUNSEL 2 I.T.A. NO.3143/CHNY/17 FOR THE ASSESSEE. ADMITTEDLY, THE TAX EFFECT INVOL VED IN THIS APPEAL IS LESS THAN 20 LAKHS, WHICH IS LESS THAN THE MONETARY LIMIT FIX ED BY THE CBDT FOR THE REVENUE TO FILE APPEAL BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, WHILE DIRECTING THE ASS ESSING OFFICER TO FILE APPEAL BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL, HAD NOT CONSID ERED THE SO-CALLED AUDIT OBJECTION SAID TO BE RAISED BY THE REVENUES AUDIT PARTY. SINCE THE REVENUES AUDIT PARTY OBJECTION WAS NOT B ROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF THE COMMISSIONER AT THE TIME OF GRANTING PERMISSION TO FILE THE APPEAL BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL, THE APPEAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE. IT IS OBLIGATORY FOR THE ASSESSING OFFICER OR THE OTHER A UTHORITY TO BRING TO THE NOTICE OF THE COMMISSIONER THE AUDIT OBJECTION, IF ANY, AT THE TIME OF PUTTING UP THE PAPERS FOR DIRECTION / APPRO VAL UNDER SECTION 253(2) OF THE I.T. ACT BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER. SI NCE THE COMMISSIONER HAD NOT CONSIDERED THE SO-CALLED AUDIT OBJECTION AT THE TIME OF GRANTING APPROVAL / DIRECTION FOR FILIN G THE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSING OFF ICER IS NOT MAINTAINABLE. THIS VIEW OF THE TRIBUNAL IS FORTIFI ED BY THE JUDGMENT OF MADRAS HIGH COURT IN PRINCIPAL CIT V. M/S PARAGO N STEELS (P.) LTD. (T.C.A. NO.579 OF 2017) DATED 07.12.2017. ACC ORDINGLY, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 3 I.T.A. NO.3143/CHNY/17 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE S TANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AFTER CONCLUSI ON OF HEARING ON 13 TH AUGUST, 2018, AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (. !' ) ( . . . ) (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) (N.R.S. GANESAN) $ / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 4 /DATED, THE 13 TH AUGUST, 2018. KRI. . ,156 76(1 /COPY TO: 1. *+ /APPELLANT 2. ,-*+ /RESPONDENT 3. 0 81 () /CIT(A)-18, CHENNAI-34 4. PRINCIPAL CIT, CENTRAL-2, CHENNAI 5. 69 ,1 /DR 6. :' ; /GF.