The DCIT, Circle-6, Surat V. M/s. Jivraj Tea Company, Surat

ITA 3145/AHD/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9951 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-01-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 17-12-2015
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 06-11-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DILEEP KUMAR SRDR
• Keywords: Audit objection
• Section: 2

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA NO. 3145/AHD/2015 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 ACIT, CIRCLE-2(3), SURAT .. APPELLANT VS M/S. JIVRAJ TEA COMPANY, 5/528, JIVRAJ CHAMBER, RUWALA TEKRA BHAGAL, SURAT .. RESPONDENT PAN : AACFJ 2236 R REVENUE BY : SHRI DILEEP KUMAR, SR-DR ASSESSEE(S) BY : NONE / DATE OF HEARING 1 7 /12/2015 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 01 / 01 /201 6 / O R D E R THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE OR DER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-1, SUR AT DATED 31.08.2015 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10, DELETING THE PENALTY OF RS.5,70,389/- IMPOSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S 2 71(1)(C) OF THE ACT. 2. I HAVE HEARD THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL PLACED BEFORE ME. I FIND THAT PRIMA-FACI E THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS NOT MAINTAINABLE IN VIEW OF CBDT CIRCUL AR NO. 21/2015 IN F.NO.279/MISC. 142/2007-ITJ (PT) DATED 10 TH DECEMBER 2015, VIDE WHICH IT HAS BEEN PROVIDED THAT IF THE TAX EF FECT BY VIRTUE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)S ORDER I S BELOW RS.10,00,000/-, THEN THAT ORDER WOULD NOT BE CHALLENGED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL IN FURTHER APPEAL. THE BOARD HAS PROVIDED EXEMPTIONS AT CLAUSE (8) OF THE INSTRUCTIONS WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN PRO VIDED THAT THESE INSTRUCTIONS WILL NOT BE APPLICABLE, IF VIRES OF ANY PROVISIONS HAS BEEN ITA NO. 3145 /AHD/2015 CIT VS. M/S. JIVRAJ TEA COMPANY AY 2009-2010 2 QUASHED BY IMPUGNED ORDER OR ADDITION WAS MADE ON SO ME AUDIT OBJECTIONS OR THE ADDITION RELATES TO UNDISCLOSED FOREI GN ASSETS/BANK ACCOUNTS, ETC. I FIND THAT THE PRESENT CASE DOES NOT FALL WITHIN THE EXEMPTION CLAUSE AND THE TAX IS LESS THAN RS.10,00,000/ -. THEREFORE, THE PRESENT APPEAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE AND H ENCE DISMISSED. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DI SMISSED IN LIMINE . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 1ST JANUARY, 2016 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- ( SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV ) JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 01/01/2016 BIJU T., PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ! ' ' # / CONCERNED CIT 4. ' ' # ( ) / THE CIT(A) 5. &'( ! , ' ! , / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. (- . / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, TRUE COPY / ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) !', / ITAT, AHMEDABAD