ASST CIT 21(3), MUMBAI V. TEKNIC INDUSTRIES, MUMBAI

ITA 3476/MUM/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2378 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-07-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 08-06-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: RODNEY LOUIS
• Keywords: Audit objection; Tax effect
• Section: 12A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH I, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S.PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 3476/MUM/2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10) THE ACIT 21(3). 2 ND FLOOR, PIRAMAL CHAMBERS, LALBAUG, MUMBAI. ... APPELLANT VS. M/S. TEKNIC INDUSTRIES, 116, HAMMERSMITH INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, OFF SHITALADEVI TEMPLE ROAD, MAHIM (W), MUMBAI -400 016 PAN: AABFT 6094J .... RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI JAVED AKHTAR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI RODNEY LOUIS DATE OF HEARING : 28/07/2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29/07/2016 ORDER PER G.S.PANNU,A.M: THE CAPTIONED APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE PERTAININ G TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 IS DIRECTED AGAINST AN ORDE R PASSED BY CIT(A)- 33, MUMBAI DATED 20/03/2015, WHICH IN TURN ARISES O UT OF AN ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 143(3 ) R.W.S. OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) DATED 24 /02/2014. 2. THE CBDT VIDE CIRCULAR NO.21/2015 DATED 10/12/ 2015 HAS REVISED THE MONETARY LIMITS FOR FILING OF APPEALS BY THE DE PARTMENT BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL RETROSPECTIVELY. THE TAX EFFECT IN DISPUT E IN THE CAPTIONED 2 ITA NO. 3476/MUM/2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10) APPEAL IS STATED TO BE BELOW THE MONETARY LIMIT OF RS.10.00 LACS SPECIFIED IN THE CBDT CIRCULAR DATED 10/12/2015 (SU PRA). 3. IN THIS BACKGROUND, LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTAT IVE APPEARING FOR THE REVENUE WAS REQUIRED TO STATE HIS POSITION. HE HAS NOT BROUGHT OUT ANY MATERIAL TO SUGGEST THAT THE CAPTIONED APPE AL IS PROTECTED BY ANY OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES PRESCRIBED IN PARA-8 OF TH E CIRCULAR DATED 10/12/2015 (SUPRA) AND AS A CONSEQUENCE SUCH APPEAL IS LIABLE TO BE TREATED AS WITHDRAWN/NOT PRESSED. THE RELEVANT POR TION OF THE CIRCULAR DATED 10/12/2015 (SUPRA) IS REPRODUCED BELOW:- 3.HENCEFORTH APPEALS/SLPS SHALL NOT BE FILED IN CAS ES WHERE THE TAX EFFECT DOES NOT EXCEED THE MONETARY LIMITS GIVEN HEREUNDER:- SL. NO. APPEALS IN INCOME-TAX MATTERS MONETARY LIMI TS (IN RS.) 1. BEFORE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 10,00,000 2. BEFORE HIGH COURT 20,00,000 3. BEFORE SUPREME COURT 25,00,000 .................................................. ................................................... ............................ 4. FOR THIS PURPOSE, 'TAX EFFECT' MEANS THE DIFFERE NCE BETWEEN THE TAX ON THE TOTAL INCOME ASSESSED AND THE TAX THAT WOULD HAVE B EEN CHARGEABLE HAD SUCH TOTAL INCOME BEEN REDUCED BY THE AMOUNT OF INCOME I N RESPECT OF THE ISSUES AGAINST WHICH APPEAL IS INTENDED TO BE FILED (HEREI NAFTER REFERRED TO AS 'DISPUTED ISSUES'). HOWEVER THE TAX WILL NOT INCLUDE ANY INTE REST THEREON, EXCEPT WHERE CHARGEABILITY OF INTEREST ITSELF IS IN DISPUTE. I N CASE THE CHARGEABILITY OF INTEREST IS THE ISSUE UNDER DISPUTE, THE AMOUNT OF INTEREST SHALL BE THE TAX EFFECT. IN CASES WHERE RETURNED LOSS IS REDUCED OR ASSESSED AS INCOM E, THE TAX EFFECT WOULD INCLUDE NOTIONAL TAX ON DISPUTED ADDITIONS. IN CASE OF PENALTY ORDERS, THE TAX EFFECT WILL MEAN QUANTUM OF PENALTY DELETED OR REDU CED IN THE ORDER TO BE APPEALED AGAINST. 8. ADVERSE JUDGMENTS RELATING TO THE FOLLOWING ISS UES SHOULD BE CONTESTED ON MERITS NOTWITHSTANDING THAT THE TAX EFFECT ENTAI LED IS LESS THAN THE MONETARY LIMITS SPECIFIED IN PARA 3 ABOVE OR THERE IS NO TAX EFFECT: (A) WHERE THE CONSTITUTIONAL VALIDITY OF THE PROVISIONS OF AN ACT OR RULE ARE UNDER CHALLENGE, OR (B) WHERE BOARD'S ORDER, NOTIFICATION, INSTRUCTION OR C IRCULAR HAS BEEN HELD 3 ITA NO. 3476/MUM/2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10) TO BE ILLEGAL OR ULTRA VIRES, OR (C) WHERE REVENUE AUDIT OBJECTION IN THE CASE HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT, OR (D) WHERE THE ADDITION RELATES TO UNDISCLOSED FOREIGN A SSETS/ BANK ACCOUNTS. 9. THE MONETARY LIMITS SPECIFIED IN PARA 3 ABOVE S HALL NOT APPLY TO WRIT MATTERS AND DIRECT TAX MATTERS OTHER THAN INCOME TA X. FILING OF APPEALS IN OTHER DIRECT TAX MATTERS SHALL CONTINUE TO BE GOVER NED BY RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF STATUTE & RULES. FURTHER, FILING OF APPEAL IN CA SES OF INCOME TAX, WHERE THE TAX EFFECT IS NOT QUANTIFIABLE OR NOT INVOLVED, SUC H AS THE CASE OF REGISTRATION OF TRUSTS OR INSTITUTIONS UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE IT ACT, 1961, SHALL NOT BE GOVERNED BY THE LIMITS SPECIFIED IN PARA 3 ABOVE AN D DECISION TO FILE APPEAL IN SUCH CASES MAY BE TAKEN ON MERITS OF A PARTICULAR C ASE. 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 ABOVE MAY BE WITHDRAWAL NOT PRESSED. APPEALS BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT WILL BE GOVERNED BY THE INSTRUCTIONS ON THIS SUBJECT, OPERATIVE AT THE TIME WHEN SUCH APPEAL WAS FILED. (UNDERLINED FOR EMPHASIS BY US) 4. WITHOUT GOING INTO THE MERIT OF THE ISSUES RAISE D IN THE CAPTIONED APPEAL, THIS APPEAL IS DEEMED TO BE WITHD RAWN/NOT PRESSED AS ITS FILING IS IN CONTRAVENTION OF THE C BDT CIRCULAR DATED 10/12/2015(SUPRA). 6. IN CONCLUSION, BY APPLYING THE CBDT CIRCULAR DAT ED 10/12/2015 (SUPRA), THE CAPTIONED APPEAL OF THE REV ENUE IS DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN/NOT PRESSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 29/07/2016 SD/- SD/- (RAVISH SOOD) (G.S. PANNU) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOCUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED 29/07/2016 VM , SR. PS 4 ITA NO. 3476/MUM/2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10) COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT , 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(A)- 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) ITAT, MUMBAI