ITO, Jaipur V. SMT. NEETA AGARWAL, Jaipur

ITA 373/JPR/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6353 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-07-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 11-05-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: J C KULHARI
• Assessee Lawyers: MANISH AGARWAL CA DHK
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHE S, JAIPUR JH FOT; IKY JKO ] U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH FOE FLAG ;KNO] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM VK;DJ VIHY LA- @ ITA NO. 373/JP/2017 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z @ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12 INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 6(1), JAIPUR. CUKE VS. SMT. NEETA AGARWAL, PROP.- HERBS & HERBS, 4-KA-41, JAWAHAR NAGAR, JAIPUR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA - @THVKBZVKJ LA - @ PAN/GIR NO.: ABRPA 9050 C VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT JKTLO DH VKSJ LS @ REVENUE BY : SHRI J.C. KULHARI (JCIT) FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ L S@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (CA). LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K @ DATE OF HEARING: 24/07/2018 MN?KKS'K.KK DH RKJH[K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 25/07/2018 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M.: THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 09/02/2017 OF CIT (A), AJMER FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEA R 2011-12. THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL:- I) WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE ADDIT ION OF RS. 49,71,839/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE OF COMM ISSION EXPENSES ON SALE. II) WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES O F THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE CIT (A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE ADDI TION OF RS. 1,00,000/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE OF JOB W ORK EXPENSES. III) WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN RESTRICTING TH E ADDITION TO RS. 2 ITA NO. 373/JP/2017 ITO VS. NEETA AGARWAL 19,495/- INSTEAD OF RS. 38,990/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE OUT OF GENERAL AND TELEPHONE EXPENSES. IV) THE APPELLANT CRAVES ITS RIGHTS TO ADD, AMEND O R ALTER ANY OF THE GROUNDS ON OR BEFORE THE HEARING. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESS EE HAS RAISED AN OBJECTION OF MAINTAINABILITY OF THE APPEAL OF THE R EVENUE DUE TO THE TAX EFFECT NOT EXCEEDING RS. 20 LACS AS PER THE CBDT CIRCLE NO . 3 OF 2018 DATED 11 TH JULY, 2018. THE LD. A/R SUBMITTED THAT IN THE FACTS OF T HE PRESENT CASE, TAX EFFECT IN REVENUES APPEAL IS STATED TO BE RS. 15,73,222/- ON THE ADDITION OF RS 50,91,334/- WHICH IS BELOW THE PRESCRIBED LIMIT OF RS 20 LACS. 3. THE LD. D/R HAS FAIRLY SUBMITTED THAT THE TAX EF FECT INVOLVED IN THE REVENUES APPEAL IS LESS THAN 20 LACS WHICH IS PRES CRIBED THRESHOLD LIMIT IN TERMS OF THE CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 3/2018 DATED 11 TH JULY, 2018 ISSUED IN SUPERSESSION OF ITS EARLIER CIRCULAR NO. 21 OF 2015 DATED 10.12.2015. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE DEMAND/ TAX EFFE CT IN THE REVENUES APPEAL IN QUESTION IS BELOW RS. 20.00 LACS. UNDER THE POWE RS VESTED BY SECTION. 268A(1) OF THE I T ACT, CBDT HAS RECENTLY ISSUED CIR CULAR NO. 3/2018 DATED 11 TH JULY, 2018 (F NO. 279/MISC. 142/2007-ITJ(PT) INSTRUCTING THE AUTHORITIES BELOW THAT DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL SHOULD NOT BE FILED BEFORE ITAT WHERE THE DEMAND/TAX EFFEC T DOES NOT EXCEED RS. 20 LACS. THE CIRCULAR IS SPECIFICALLY ME NTIONED TO BE APPLICABLE FOR ALL PENDING APPEALS. 5. SUBJECT TO SOME EXCEPTIONS, IT IS FURTHER DIREC TED BY CBDT THAT ALL THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS PENDING BEFORE ITAT WHERE THE DEMAND/TAX EFFECT IS NOT 3 ITA NO. 373/JP/2017 ITO VS. NEETA AGARWAL EXCEEDING THAN 20 LACS SHOULD BE EITHER WITHDRAWN O R NOT PRESSED BY THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVES. 6. THE PRESENT APPEAL IS NOT COVERED BY ANY EXCEPT IONS MENTIONED IN THE SAID CBDT CIRCULAR. SINCE THE TAX DEMAND IN DISPUT E IN THIS DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL IS BELOW THE LIMIT SET OUT BY CBDT FOR THE A PPEAL, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS NOT MAINTAINABLE IN VIEW OF CBDT CIRCUL AR NO. 3 OF 2018 DATED 11.07.2018. ACCORDINGLY THE APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMEN T IS DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED/WITHDRAWN. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISM ISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 25/07/2018 . SD/- SD/- FOT; IKY JKO FOE FLAG ;KNO (VIJAY PAL RAO) (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 25 TH JULY, 2018 *RANJAN VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- THE ITO, WARD 6(1), JAIPUR. 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- SMT. NEETA AGARWAL, JAIPUR. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K]T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 373/JP/2017 ) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASST. REGISTRAR