ITO, Faridabad V. M/s. Meta Forge India, Faridabad

ITA 3232/DEL/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 53213 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-11-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 16-11-2011
• Assessment Year: 2002-2003
• Appeal Filed On: 30-06-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R S NEGISR
• Assessee Lawyers: ASHWANI TANEJA
• Keywords: Tax effect; Reason to believe

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH E DELHI) BEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN AND SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA ITA NO. 3232(DEL)2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2002-03 INCOME TAX OFFICER, M/S. META FORGE INDIA, WARD 1(5), NEW CGO COMPLEX, V. 403, SEC. 1 5A, FARIDABAD. NH IV, FARIDABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SH. R.S. NEGI,SR. DR RESPONDENT BY: SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA, ADVOCATE ORDER PER A.D. JAIN, J.M. THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS), FARIDABAD DAT ED 30.04.2010 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE ARE AS UNDER:- 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN HOLDING THAT THERE EXISTED NO REASON TO BELIEVE THAT ANY INCOME HAD ESCAPED ASSESSMENT IN COMPLETE DISREGARD OF FACT THAT THE AO HAVING REASONS TO BEL IEVE THAT CASH PREMIUM AMOUNT OF ` 7,13,000/- WAS OVER AND ABOVE THE NET SALE VALUE OF THE PLOT AND THE SAME WAS OUT OF UNDISCLOSED SOU RCES OF ITS INCOME AND THERE WAS NO CHALLENGE TO THE AO BELIEF ALL THR OUGH THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WHEN CONFRONTED. ITA 3232(DEL)2010 2 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN ANNULLING THE ASSE SSMENT ORDER BY SIMPLY RELYING ON THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEES REPRESENTATIVE AND HAS COMMITTED ILLEGALITY BY FAILING TO CONSIDER ALL MATERIAL FACTS AND EVIDENCE BROUGHT ON RECORD BY THE AO AND WHICH WER E DULY CONFRONTED TO THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSE OF ASS ESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND IN REPLY, THE ASSESSEES COUNSEL AT TENDED ON 30.6.2009 AND HAS FAILED TO SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THES E MATERIAL AND EVIDENCES EXCEPT FURNISHING A COPY OF SALE DEED ONL Y. 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN HOLDING THAT AFTER QUASHING OF THE ASSESSMENT AS NULL AND VOID AND STATING THAT MERITS OF ADDITION OF ` 7,13,000/- MADE WITHOUT ANY CO-RELATIVE EVIDENCE IS NOT DEALT WITH FOR ANY ADJUDICATION WITHOUT DECIDING THE ADDITION OF ` 7,13,000/- MADE BY THE AO ON MERITS. 2. AT THE THRESHOLD, WE NOTE THAT TAX EFFECT IN TH IS CASE IS LESS THAN ` 3 LAKHS FIXED BY THE CBDT FOR FILING APPEAL BEFORE TH E TRIBUNAL. AS PER INSTRUCTION NO. 3/2011 (F.NO. 279/MISC./142/2007-IT J) DATED 09.02.2011 ISSUED BY THE CBDT, THE TAX EFFECT FOR FILING APPEA L BEFORE THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SHOULD BE MORE THAN ` 3 LAKHS. THE AFORESAID INSTRUCTIONS HAVE BEEN HELD TO BE APPLICABLE TO ALL PENDING APPEALS B Y THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE DECISIONS IN THE CASES:- (I) C.I.T. VS. M/S P.S. JAIN & CO. IN ITA NO. 179/1 991, ORDER DATED 2 ND AUGUST, 2010. (II) C.I.T. VS. DELHI RACE CLUB IN ITA NO. 128/2008 , ORDER DATED 3 RD MARCH, 2011. ITA 3232(DEL)2010 3 3. IN THE PRESENT CASE, ADMITTEDLY THE TAX IS BELOW ` 3 LAKHS. HENCE, THE APPEAL IS IN CONTRAVENTION OF THE AFORESAID CBDT CIRCULAR/INSTRUCTION. HENCE, THE SAME IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED. ACCORDINGLY, THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE STANDS DISM ISSED FOR TAX EFFECT. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE I S DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 16.11.201 1. SD/- SD/- (SHAMIM YAHYA) (A.D. JAIN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 16.11.2011 *RM COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR TRUE COPY BY ORDER DEPUTY REGISTRAR