ITO, Ward- 1(5), Noida V. Jagan Nath Bhandari, Gautam Budh Nagar

ITA 3505/DEL/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4344 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-10-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 11-05-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ARE AGAINST IMP UGNED S PASSED
• Keywords: Retrospective amendment; Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: SMC, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 3505/DEL/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(5), A-2D, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, SECTOR-24, NOIDA-201301 (UP) VS. SH. JAGAN NATH BHANDARI S/O SH. TEK CHAND BHANDARI, E-106, SECTOR-21, JALVAYU VIHAR, NOIDA, DISTT. GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR, (PAN: AIJPB4379A) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ORDER THESE APPEALS BY THE REVENUE ARE AGAINST THE IMP UGNED ORDERS PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A)-I, NOIDA IN RELATION TO A SSESSMENT YEARS 2009-10. 2. THE LEARNED DR SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESS ING OFFICER, BUT COULD NOT CONTROVERT THE FACT THAT THE TAX EFFECT INVOLVE D IN THIS APPEAL IS LESS THAN RS.20,00,000/-. 3. IN THIS CASE, NOTICE OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE WAS SENT BY THE REGISTERED AD POST, IN SPITE OF THE SAME, ASSESSEE, NOR ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE APPEARED TO PROSECUTE THE MATTER IN DISPUTE, NOR FILED ANY APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT. KEEPING IN VIEW THE F ACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PRESENT CASE AND THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THE P RESENT APPEAL, I AM OF THE VIEW THAT NO USEFUL PURPOSE WOULD BE SERVED TO ISSU E NOTICE AGAIN AND AGAIN TO THE ASSESSEE, THEREFORE, I AM DECIDING THE PRES ENT APPEALS EXPARTE QUA ASSESSEE, AFTER HEARING THE LD. DR AND PERUSING THE RECORDS. 4. I HAVE HEARD THE LD. DR AND PERUSED THE RELEVAN T MATERIAL ON RECORD. IT IS NOTICED THAT RECENTLY THE CBDT HAS ISSUED CIR CULAR NO. 03 OF 2018, DEPARTMENT BY SH. B.S. ANANT, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY NONE 2 DATED 11TH JULY, 2018 WITH RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT, RE VISING THE MONETARY LIMIT TO RS.20,00,000/- FOR NOT FILING APPEALS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 5. FROM THE AFORE-NOTED CIRCULAR, IT IS PALPABLE TH AT THE INSTRUCTION IS APPLICABLE TO THE PENDING APPEALS ALSO WITH RETROSP ECTIVE EFFECT AND THERE IS A CLEAR-CUT DIRECTION TO THE DEPARTMENT TO WITHDRAW O R NOT PRESS SUCH APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE ITAT, WHEREIN TAX EFFECT IS LESS T HAN RS.20,00,000/-. GOING BY THE PRESCRIPTION OF THE AFORE-NOTED CIRCULAR, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE REVENUE SHOULD HAVE EITHER NOT FILED THE INSTANT AP PEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL OR WITHDRAWN THE SAME AS THE TAX EFFECT IN THIS APP EAL IS ADMITTEDLY LESS THAN THE PRESCRIBED LIMIT, I.E., RS. 20,00,000/- FOR NOT FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. ACCORDINGLY, I DISMISS THE INSTANT APPEA LS FILED BY THE REVENUE WITHOUT GOING INTO MERITS OF THE CASE. HOWEVER, THE DEPARTMENT IS AT LIBERTY TO FILE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION, IF THE TAX EFFEC T IS FOUND TO BE MORE THAN THE PRESCRIBED LIMITED OF RS.20,00,000/- OR OTHERWI SE. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE STAND DISMISSED. 6. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE S TAND DISMISSED. THE DECISION IS PRONOUNCED ON 31 ST OCTOBER, 2018. SD/- (H.S. SIDHU) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 31 ST OCTOBER, 2018. SRBHATNAGAR COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR ASST. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI 3