Balendra Pratap Srivastava, Bahraich V. Income Tax Officer, GONDA

ITA 328/LKW/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5557 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 3 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-08-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 22-05-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Additional evidence; Tax effect
• Section: 40A(3)

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NOS.328 & 300/LKW/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2011-12 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH A, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI A. D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI T. S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.328/LKW/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2011-12 SRI BALENDRA PRATAP SRIVASTAVA, KANOONGOPURA, BAHRAICH. PAN:AOTPS4374N VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, GONDA. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO.300/LKW/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2011-12 A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-GONDA. VS. SRI BALENDRA PRATAP SRIVASTAVA, KANOONGOPURA, BAHRAICH. PAN:AOTPS4374N (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) O R D E R PER T. S. KAPOOR:A.M. THESE ARE CROSS APPEALS, FILED BY THE REVENUE AND THE ASSESSEE, AGAINST THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A) DATED 10/02/201 7. 2. AT THE OUTSET, LEARNED A. R. INVITED OUR ATTENTI ON TO THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AND SUBMITTED THAT THIS APPEAL OF TH E REVENUE IS NOT MAINTAINABLE AS THE TAX EFFECT IN THIS APPEAL IS BE LOW THE MONETARY LIMIT OF ASSESSEE BY SHRI J. J. MEHROTRA, F.C.A. REVENUE BY SMT. ALKA SINGH, D.R. DATE OF HEARING 22 / 08 /201 9 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 22 / 08 /201 9 I.T.A. NOS.328 & 300/LKW/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2011-12 2 RS.50 LACS. LEARNED D. R. FAIRLY AGREED THAT THE T AX EFFECT IN THIS CASE IS BELOW THE MONETARY LIMIT OF RS.50 LACS. 3. AS REGARDS THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IN I.T.A. NO.32 8, LEARNED A. R. SUBMITTED THAT THE ONLY GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE I N THIS APPEAL IS THE ACTION OF LEARNED CIT(A) BY WHICH HE HAS SUSTAINED THE ADD ITION OF RS.24,67,247/- U/S 40A(3) OF THE ACT. LEARNED A. R. IN THIS RESPE CT SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS FORCED TO MAKE PAYMENT THROUGH BEARER CHEQUES AS THE PAYEE WAS INSISTING FOR PAYMENT EITHER BY CASH OR BY BEAR ER CHEQUES. LEARNED A. R. IN THIS RESPECT SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IN THE FORM OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH MAY BE CONSIDERED. LEARNED A. R. ALSO SUBMITTED THAT ALONG WITH THE AF FIDAVIT, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED A CERTIFICATE FROM THE PAYEE WHEREIN HE HAS A FFIRMED THAT HE HAS INSISTED ON CASH PAYMENT FOR PURCHASES MADE BY THE ASSESSEE. 4. LEARNED D. R., ON THE OTHER HAND, SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE HAD M ADE PAYMENTS THROUGH BEARER CHEQUE AND, THEREFORE, LEARNED CIT(A) HAS RI GHTLY SUSTAINED THE ADDITION U/S 40A(3) OF THE ACT. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL PARTIES AND HAVE GONE TH ROUGH THE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD. AS REGARDS THE APPEAL FILED BY T HE ASSESSEE, WE FIND THAT ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN AFFIDAVIT AND HAS ALSO FILED A CERTIFICATE FROM THE PAYEE REGARDING CONFIRMATION OF CASH PAYMENT WHEREIN THE PAYEE HAS ALSO CONFIRMED THAT AS HE WAS NOT KNOWING TO THE ASSESSE E THEREFORE, HE HAD INSISTED FOR CASH PAYMENT. BESIDES THAT THE ASSESS EE HAS ALSO FILED AN AFFIDAVIT STATING THEREIN THE REASON FOR MAKING THE PAYMENT IN CASH. SINCE THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY PAYEE WAS NOT BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND MOREOVER, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED DULY SIGNED AND SW ORN IN AFFIDAVIT THEREFORE, WE DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO REMIT THIS ISS UE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE I.T.A. NOS.328 & 300/LKW/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2011-12 3 ASSESSING OFFICER WHO SHOULD READJUDICATE THE ISSUE AFTER GIVING PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE OF BEING HEARD. IN VIE W OF THE ABOVE, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTIC AL PURPOSES. 6. NOW COMING TO THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE. WE FIND THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN THIS APPEAL IS LESS THAN RS.50 LACS. HENC E THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT IS NOT MAINTAINABLE IN VIEW OF CBDTS CI RCULAR NO.17/2019, DATED 8 TH AUGUST, 2019, F. NO.270/MISC.142/2007-ITJ(PT.) AND IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED AS SUCH. THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXE S, VIDE CIRCULAR NO.17/2019, DATED 8 TH AUGUST, 2019, F. NO.270/MISC.142/2007-ITJ(PT.), HA S ISSUED THE DIRECTION IN SUPERSESSION OF THE CIRCULA R NO. 3/2018 DATED 11 TH JULY, 2018, F.NO.279 OF MISC.142/2007-ITJ (PT.), I N CONSONANCE WITH THE POWER ENTRUSTED UNDER SECTION 268A OF THE INCOME TA X ACT, 1961 THAT NO APPEAL SHOULD BE FILED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL IN CASE THE TAX EFFECT DOES NOT EXCEED RS.50 LAKHS. IN THE BACKDROP OF THE CBDT CI RCULAR NO.17/2019, THE AHMEDABAD BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL, IN ITS RECENT ORDE R PASSED ON 14 TH AUGUST, 2019 IN THE CASE OF INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3(2), AHMEDABAD VS. DINESH MADHAVLAL PATEL, AHMEDABAD AND OTHERS IN ITA NO. 1398/AHD/2004, ETC., DISPOSING OFF 628 APPEALS AND CROSS OBJECTION S, OBSERVED AND HELD AS BELOW: THESE 628 APPEALS AND COS PERTAIN TO THE APPEALS A RE FILED BY VARIOUS ASSESSING OFFICERS, ALL THESE APPEALS CALL INTO QUESTION CORRECTNESS OF THE RELIEF GRANTED TO THE TAXPAYERS BY THE COMMISSIONERS OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AND, MOST IMP ORTANTLY, THE TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN ALL THESE APPEALS DOES N OT EXCEED RS.50,00,000 IN EACH OF THESE APPEALS. THE CROSS OB JECTIONS TAKEN UP FOR HEARING ARE ONLY SUCH CROSS OBJECTIONS AS EM ANATE FROM THESE APPEALS AND ARE BROADLY IN SUPPORT OF THE ORD ERS PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS). IN THESE CASES, IN THE LIGHT OF THE DISCUSSIONS WITH THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER O F INCOME TAX (GUJARAT) AND REPRESENTATIVES OF THE AHMEDABAD ITAT BAR ASSOCIATION, INDIVIDUAL NOTICES ARE DISPENSED WITH; NOTICES OF HEARING ARE GIVEN ONLY THROUGH THE NOTICE BOARD. I.T.A. NOS.328 & 300/LKW/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2011-12 4 2. IT IS IN THIS BACKDROP THAT WE ARE PLEASED TO TA KE NOTE OF A VERY PRAGMATIC AND TAXPAYER FRIENDLY POLICY DECISION BY THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA FOR REDUCING THE INCOME TAX LIT IGATION. VIDE CBDT CIRCULAR DATED 8TH AUGUST, 2019, THE INCOME TA X DEPARTMENT HAS FURTHER LIBERALIZED ITS POLICY FOR N OT FILING APPEALS AGAINST THE DECISIONS OF THE APPELLATE AUTHORITIES IN FAVOUR OF THE TAXPAYERS, WHEREIN TAX INVOLVED IS BELOW CERTAIN TH RESHOLD LIMITS, AND ANNOUNCED ITS POLICY DECISION NOT TO FILE, OR P RESS, THE APPEALS, BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL, AGAINST THE APPELLAT E ORDERS FAVOURABLE TO THE ASSESSEE IN THE CASES IN WHICH OV ERALL TAX EFFECT, EXCLUDING INTEREST- EXCEPT WHEN INTEREST ITSELF IS IN DISPUTE, IS RS 50,00,000 OR LESS. WHAT IT MEANS, IN PLAIN WORDS, I S THAT WHEN A COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) GIVES THE TAXPAYER TAX RELIE F OF UPTO RS 50 LAKHS IN AN APPEAL IN AN ASSESSMENT YEAR, THE MA TTER ENDS THERE AND THE RELIEF SO GRANTED BY THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) CANNOT BE CHALLENGED BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL, THAT WHE N THIS TRIBUNAL GIVES THE TAXPAYER RELIEF OF UPTO RS 1 CRO RE IN AN APPEAL IN AN ASSESSMENT YEAR, THE MATTER ENDS THERE AND TH E RELIEF SO GRANTED BY THE TRIBUNAL CANNOT BE CHALLENGED BEFORE THE HONBLE HIGH COURT, AND THAT WHEN HONBLE HIGH COURT GIVES RELIEF OF UPTO RS 2 CRORE TO THE TAXPAYER IN AN APPEAL IN AN ASSESSMENT YEAR, THAT RELIEF CANNOT BE CHALLENGED BEFORE HONB LE SUPREME COURT. THESE MONETARY THRESHOLD LIMITS FOR FILING O F APPEALS BY THE INCOME TAX AUTHORITIES DO NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT INTEREST AND OTHER COROLLARIES OF THE TAX DEMANDS BEING CONFIRME D SUCH AS PENALTIES, EXCEPT WHEN A PENALTY ITSELF IS SUBJECT MATTER OF LITIGATION, AND PROSECUTIONS. THE ENHANCEMENT OF TH ESE MONETARY LIMITS IS AT AN UNPRECEDENTED SCALE. THE MONETARY L IMIT FOR APPEALS BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL, WHICH WAS RS 3,00,000 TILL 10TH JULY 2014, HAS BEEN IN EFFECT ENHANCED TO ALMOST 1, 700% IN THE LAST FIVE YEARS. THIS SUBSTANTIAL RELAXATION IS CER TAINLY A HUGE STEP WHICH SIGNIFIES TRUST REPOSED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA IN THE DECISIONS OF THE APPELLATE FORUMS, AND SUBSTANTIALL Y CUTS DOWN TIME TAKEN IN THE FINALITY OF THE APPELLATE PROCESS . IT IS INDEED HEARTENING TO NOTE THAT IN ONE STROKE, THE GOVERNME NT HAS NOT ONLY PREVENTED, BUT HAS, IN EFFECT, SET THE STAGE F OR WITHDRAWAL OF THOUSANDS OF APPEALS BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL AND BEFOR E HONBLE COURTS ABOVE. IN AN ENVIRONMENT IN WHICH RETROSPECT IVITY WAS ATTACHED ONLY TO THE TAXATION AND NOT TO TAX RELIEF S OR CONCESSIONS, SUCH AN APPROACH IS A PLEASANT DEPARTU RE FROM LEGACY PRACTICES. I.T.A. NOS.328 & 300/LKW/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2011-12 5 3. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACTUAL BACKGROUND AND THE GENEROUS CONCESSION BY THIS BENEVOLENT CBDT CIRCULAR, ALL TH ESE APPEALS MUST BE DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN AND THE RELATED CROS S OBJECTIONS MUST BE DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS. THERE IS, HOWEVER , A SMALL ISSUE THAT WE MUST DEAL WITH. 4. SMT APARNA AGARWAL, LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESE NTATIVE, HOWEVER, HAS A POINT TO MAKE. SHE POINTS OUT THAT T HE CIRCULAR DATED 8 TH AUGUST 2019 IS NOT CLEARLY RETROSPECTIVE INASMUCH AS IT SPECIFICALLY STATES IN PARA 4 THAT (T)HE SAID MODI FICATIONS SHALL COME INTO EFFECT FROM THE DATE OF ISSUE OF THIS CIR CULAR. IT IS THUS POINTED OUT THAT THIS SENTENCE GIVES AN IMPRESSION THAT IS ONLY AFTER THE DATE OF THE SAID CIRCULAR THAT THE DEPART MENTAL APPEALS WILL NOT BE FILED IN THE CASES WITHIN THE SPECIFIED TAX EFFECT LIMITS. WE ARE URGED TO BEAR IN MIND THE IMPACT OF THIS OBS ERVATION WHILE GIVING EFFECT TO THE CIRCULAR DATED 8 TH AUGUST, 2019. SHE, HOWEVER, HASTENS TO ADD THAT SHE IS YET TO HAVE ANY SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS ON THE ISSUE AND SHE LEAVES IT FOR THE BENCH TO TAKE THE APPROPRIATE CALL. LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES APPEA RING FOR THE TAXPAYERS VEHEMENTLY OPPOSE THE SUGGESTION IMPLICIT IN HER SUBMISSIONS. ALL OF THEM ARE UNANIMOUS IN THEIR ARG UMENT THAT THE CIRCULAR MUST BE HELD TO HAVE RETROSPECTIVE APP LICATION AND MUST EQUALLY APPLY TO THE PENDING APPEALS AS WELL. SHRI J P SHAH, SENIOR ADVOCATE, POINTS OUT THAT THE CIRCULAR DATED 8 TH AUGUST 2019 IS NOT A STANDALONE CIRCULAR AND IT IS REQUIRE D TO BE READ WITH THE OLD CIRCULAR NO. 3 OF 2018 WHICH IS WHAT I T SEEKS TO MODIFY. THIS CIRCULAR, ACCORDING TO THE LEARNED COU NSEL, ONLY ENHANCES THE MONETARY LIMITS AND GIVES FURTHER RELA XATION. HE URGES US NOT TO READ THE CIRCULAR IN A MANNER SO AS TO NULLIFY THE UNDERLYING APPROACH AND OBJECT OF REDUCING LITIGATI ON. SHRI SOPARKAR, LEARNED SENIOR ADVOCATE, SUBMITS THAT ALL THAT THE PRESENT CIRCULAR DOES IS TO MODIFY THE MONETARY LIM ITS AND NOTHING MORE, AND, THEREFORE, IT CANNOT BE TREATED TO FOLLOW ANY OTHER APPROACH OTHER THAN THE APPROACH FOLLOWED IN THE OLD CIRCULAR. THE OLD CIRCULAR, BEYOND ANY DISPUTE OR C ONTROVERSY, CATEGORICALLY APPLIED TO THE PENDING APPEALS AS ON THE DATE OF ISSUANCE OF CIRCULAR. SHRI TUSHAR HEMANI, LEARNED S ENIOR ADVOCATE, POINTS OUT THAT THE CIRCULAR DATED 8 TH AUGUST 2019 ONLY GIVES FURTHER RELIEF NOT ONLY IN TERMS OF THE MONET ARY LIMITS BUT ALSO IN TERMS OF THE MANNER IN WHICH THE APPLICATIO N OF CIRCULAR TO ORDERS DEALING WITH MORE THAN ONE YEAR IS TO MAD E. SHRI S N I.T.A. NOS.328 & 300/LKW/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2011-12 6 DIVETIA, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, SUBMITS THAT UNLIKE IN THE CASES OF EARLIER CBDT CIRCULARS, WHICH USED TO BE IN SUPERSESSION OF EARLIER CIRCULARS ON THE ISSUES, TH E CIRCULAR DATED 8 TH AUGUST 2019 ONLY MODIFIES THE EARLIER CIRCULAR WHI CH, INTER ALIA, PROVIDED FOR ITS RETROSPECTIVE APPLICATION. O UR ATTENTION IS INVITED TO SOME JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS IN SUPPORT OF T HE CONTENTION THAT THE BENEVOLENT CIRCULAR, SUCH AS THE ONE IN QU ESTION, IS TO BE GIVEN EFFECT IN RESPECT OF THE PENDING APPEALS AS W ELL. MS URVASHI SHODHAN, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, POINTS O UTS THAT ITS PLAINLY CONTRARY TO THE SCHEME OF THE LITIGATION PO LICY OF THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA TO GIVE THIS CIRCULAR ONLY PROS PECTIVE EFFECT. SHRI S K SADHWANI, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE , INVITES OUR ATTENTION TO THE LETTER DATED 16 TH JULY 2018 ISSUED BY MEMBER CBDT TO THE ALL THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONERS O F INCOME TAX, IN THE CONTEXT OF CIRCULAR DATED 11 TH JULY 2018 THAT THE PRESENT CIRCULAR SEEKS TO MODIFY, SEEKING REPORT ON WITHDRAWAL OF THE APPEALS COVERED BY THE CIRCULAR. HE THEN POINTS OUT THAT IT IS THE OLD CIRCULAR IS STILL ALIVE TODAY AND THE ONLY CHANGE IS WITH RESPECT TO THE MONETARY LIMITS. IN ALL FAIRNESS, TH EREFORE, THE SAME APPROACH REGARDING WITHDRAWAL OF PENDING APPEALS MU ST BE FOLLOWED FOR THIS CIRCULAR AS WELL. ON THE SAME LIN ES, ARGUMENTS ARE ADVANCED BY THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES WHICH, FOR THE SAKE OF BREVITY AND TO AVOID REPETITION, WE ARE NOT REFE RRING TO IN MORE SPECIFIC DETAILS. IN BRIEF REJOINDER, LEARNED DEPAR TMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE GRACIOUSLY LEAVES THE MATTER TO US. 5. HAVING CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND HAVI NG PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD, WE DO NOT HAVE SLIGHTEST OF HESITATION IN HOLDING THAT THE CONCESSION EXTENDED BY THE CBDT NO T ONLY APPLIES TO THE APPEALS TO BE FILED IN FUTURE BUT IT IS ALSO EQUALLY APPLICABLE TO THE APPEALS PENDING FOR DISPOSAL AS O N NOW. OUR LINE OF REASONING IS THIS. THE CIRCULAR DATED 8 TH AUGUST 2019 IS NOT A STANDALONE CIRCULAR. IT IS TO BE READ IN CONJUNCT ION WITH THE CBDT CIRCULAR NO 3 OF 2018 (AND SUBSEQUENT AMENDMEN T THERETO), AND ALL IT DOES IS TO REPLACE PARAGRAPH N OS. 3 AND 5 OF THE SAID CIRCULAR. THIS IS EVIDENT FROM THE FOLLOWI NG EXTRACTS FROM THE CIRCULAR DATED 8 TH AUGUST 2019: 2. AS A STEP TOWARDS FURTHER MANAGEMENT OF LITIGATI ON. IT HAS BEEN DECIDED BY THE BOARD THAT MONETARY LIMITS FOR FILING OF APPEALS IN INCOME-TAX CASES BE ENHANCED F URTHER THROUGH AMENDMENT IN PARA 3 OF THE CIRCULAR MENTION ED I.T.A. NOS.328 & 300/LKW/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2011-12 7 ABOVE AND ACCORDINGLY. THE TABLE FOR MONETARY LIMIT S SPECIFIED IN PARA 3 OF THE CIRCULAR SHALL READ AS F OLLOWS: S.NO. APPEALS/SLPS IN INCOME-TAX MATTERS MONETARY LIMIT (RS.) 1 BEFORE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 50,00,000 2 BEFORE HIGH COURT 1,00,00,000 3 BEFORE SUPREME COURT 2,00,00,000 3. FURTHER, WITH A VIEW TO PROVIDE PARITY IN FILING OF APPEALS IN SCENARIOS WHERE SEPARATE ORDER IS PASSED BY HIGHER APPELLATE AUTHORITIES FOR EACH ASSESSMENT YE AR VIS-A-VIS WHERE COMPOSITE ORDER FOR MORE THAN ONE ASSESSMENT YEARS IS PASSED. PARA 5 OF THE CIRCULAR IS SUBSTITUTED BY THE FOLLOWING PARA: 5. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL CALCULATE THE TAX EFFECT SEPARATELY FOR EVERY ASSESSMENT YEAR IN RESPECT OF THE DISPUTED ISSUES IN THE CASE OF EVERY ASSESSEE. IF IN THE CASE OF AN ASSESSEE, THE DISPUTED ISSUES ARISE IN MORE THAN ONE ASSESSMENT YEAR, APPEAL CAN BE FILED IN RESPECT OF SUCH ASSESSMENT YEAR OR YEARS IN WHICH THE TAX EFFECT IN RESPECT OF THE DISPUTED ISSUES EXCEEDS THE MONETARY LIMIT SPECIFIED IN PARA 3. NO APPEAL SHALL BE FILED IN RESPECT OF AN ASSESSMENT YEAR OR YEARS IN WHICH THE TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN THE MONETARY LIMIT SPECIFIED IN PARA 3. FURTHER, EVEN IN THE CASE OF COMPOSITE ORDER OF ANY HIGH COURT OR APPELLATE AUTHORITY WHICH INVOLVES MORE THAN ONE ASSESSMENT YEAR AND COMMON ISSUES IN MORE THAN ONE ASSESSMENT YEAR NO APPEAL SHALL BE FILED IN RESPECT OF AN ASSESSMENT YEAR OR YEARS IN WHICH THE TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN THE MONETARY LIMIT SPECIFIED IN PARA 3. IN CASE WHERE A COMPOSITE ORDER/ JUDGEMENT INVOLVES MORE THAN ONE ASSESSEE, EACH ASSESSEE SHALL BE DEALT WITH SEPARATELY 4. THE SAID MODIFICATIONS SHALL COME INTO EFFECT F ROM THE DATE OF ISSUE OF THIS CIRCULAR. I.T.A. NOS.328 & 300/LKW/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2011-12 8 6. CLEARLY, ALL OTHER PORTIONS OF THE CIRCULAR NO. 3 OF 2018 (SUPRA) HAVE REMAINED INTACT. THE PORTION WHICH HAS REMAINED INTACT INCLUDES PARAGRAPH 13 OF THE AFORESAID CIRCU LAR WHICH IS AS FOLLOWS: 13. THIS CIRCULAR WILL APPLY TO SLPS/ APPEALS/ CROS S OBJECTIONS/ REFERENCES TO BE FILED HENCEFORTH IN SC/HCS/TRIBUNAL AND IT SHALL ALSO APPLY RETROSPECTI VELY TO PENDING SLPS/ APPEALS/ CROSS OBJECTIONS/REFERENC ES. PENDING APPEALS BELOW THE SPECIFIED TAX LIMITS IN P ARE 3 ABOVE MAY BE WITHDRAWN/ NOT PRESSED. 7. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSIONS, WE HEREBY HOL D THAT THE RELAXATION IN MONETARY LIMITS FOR DEPARTMENTAL APPE ALS, VIDE CBDT CIRCULAR DATED 8 TH AUGUST 2019 (SUPRA) SHALL BE APPLICABLE TO THE PENDING APPEALS IN ADDITION TO TH E APPEALS TO BE FILED HENCEFORTH. 8. LEARNED COMMISSIONER (DR) THEN SUBMITS LIBERTY M AY KINDLY BE GIVEN TO POINT OUT, UPON NECESSARY FURTHER VERIF ICATIONS, AND TO SEEK RECALL THE DISMISSAL OF APPEALS AND RESTORA TION OF THE APPEALS IN THE CASES (I) IN WHICH IT CAN BE DEMONST RATED THAT THE APPEALS ARE COVERED BY THE EXCEPTIONS, AND (II) WHI CH ARE INADVERTENTLY INCLUDED IN THIS BUNCH OF APPEALS, WH EREIN THE TAX EFFECT, IN TERMS OF THE CBDT CIRCULAR (SUPRA), EXCE EDS RS 50,00,000. NONE OPPOSES THIS PRAYER; WE ACCEPT THE SAME. WE MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THE APPELLANTS SHALL BE AT LIBER TY TO POINT OUT THE CASES WHICH ARE WRONGLY INCLUDED IN THE APPEALS SO SUMMARILY DISMISSED, EITHER OWING TO WRONG COMPUTAT ION OF TAX EFFECT OR OWNING TO SUCH CASES BEING COVERED BY THE PERMISSIBLE EXCEPTIONS- OR FOR ANY OTHER REASON, AND WE WILL TA KE APPROPRIATE REMEDIAL STEPS IN THIS REGARD. 9. IN THE LIGHT OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSIONS, ALL THE A PPEALS STAND DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN. AS THE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE ARE FOUND TO BE NON-MAINTAINABLE AND AS ALL THE RELATED CROSS- OBJECTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE ARISE ONLY AS A RESULT O F THOSE APPEALS AND MERELY SUPPORT THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A), THE CRO SS OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALSO DISMISSED AS INFRUCT UOUS. ORDERED, ACCORDINGLY. I.T.A. NOS.328 & 300/LKW/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2011-12 9 7. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE DISMISS THE APPEAL OF T HE REVENUE FOR LOW TAX EFFECT. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES WHEREAS THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMI SSED. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 22/08/2019) SD/. SD/. ( A. D. JAIN ) ( T. S. KAPOOR ) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED:22/08/2019 *SINGH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. D.R., I.T.A.T., LUCKNOW