ITO 9(2)(4), MUMBAI V. MHL INFOTECH AND LEASING P. LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 3950/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 55205 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-09-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 05-09-2011
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 14-05-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P C MAURYA
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIB UNAL MUMBAI BENCHES B, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.S.SYAL, AM AND SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM ITA NO.3950/MUM/2010 : ASST.YEAR 2006-2007 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 9(2)(4) MUMBAI. VS. M/S.MHL INFOTECH AND LEASING PVT.LTD. FLAT NO.3, DREAMLAND SOCIETY 393, LINKING ROAD, KHAR (WEST) MUMBAI 400 052. PAN : AAECM3194Q. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI P.C.MAURYA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI MEHUL SHAH DATE OF HEARING : 05.09.2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT :09.09.2011 O R D E R PER R.S.SYAL, AM : THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) ON 04.03.2010 IN RELATION TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-2007. 2. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES, WE FIND THAT THE TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IS LESS THAN RS.3 LAKHS AS PER THE LIMIT PRE SCRIBED BY THE CBDT VIDE INSTRUCTION NO.3 OF 2011 FOR FILING OF APPEAL BY TH E REVENUE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. IN SUCH A SITUATION THE APPEAL FILED IN CONTRAVENTI ON OF SUCH LIMIT CANNOT BE SUSTAINED. THIS VIEW IS DULY SUPPORTED BY THE DECIS ION IN THE CASE OF ACIT VS. SATISH CHANDRA, 10 SOT 383. SIMILAR VIEW HAS BEEN T AKEN BY THE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. CAMCO COLOUR CO. 254 I TR 565, WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT THE TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN THE APPEAL FIL ED BY THE REVENUE BEING LESS THAN THE MONETARY LIMIT AS PRESCRIBED IN BOARD CIRCULAR, THE SAME IS NOT MAINTAINABLE. 3. FURTHER AS REGARDS THE APPLICABILITY OF CIR CULAR OF 2011 AS APPLICABLE TO THE APPEALS FILED EARLIER, IT IS SEEN THAT THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN CIT VS. PITHWA ENGG. WORKS (2005) 276 ITR 519 (BOM) HELD T HAT THE CIRCULAR SHALL APPLY ITA NO.3792/MUM/2010 SHRI MADHUKANT P.JAIN. 2 TO THE PENDING APPEALS ALSO. THIS JUDGMENT WAS DI STINGUISHED BY BOMBAY HC IN CIT VS. CHHAJER PACKAGING AND PLASTICS (2008) 300 ITR 180 (BOM) BY HOLDING THAT THE CIRCULAR IS NOT APPLICABLE TO THE PENDING APPEALS. SOME BENCHES OF THE TRIBUNAL FOLLOWING THIS LATER JUDGMENT HELD ACCORDI NGLY. HOWEVER IN A LATER CASE IN CIT VS. MADHUKAR K. INAMDAR (HUF) (2009) 318 ITR 14 9 (BOM) IT HAS AGAIN BEEN HELD THAT INSTRUCTION 05/2008 DATED 15.5.2008 WOULD BE APPLICABLE TO CASES PENDING BEFORE THE COURTS. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE RECENT PRECEDENT FROM THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT, WE HOLD THAT THE APPEAL EARLIER FILED BY THE REVENUE CANNOT BE TAKEN UP FOR DECISION ON MERITS A S THE TAX EFFECT IN THIS CASE IS ADMITTEDLY LESS THAN RS. 3.00 LACS. WE, THEREFORE, DISMISS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AS NOT MAINTAINABLE. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 09 TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2011. SD/- SD/- (VIJAY PAL RAO) (R.S.SYAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI : 09 TH SEPTEMBER, 2011. DEVDAS*` COPY TO : 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A) - XX, MUMBAI. 5. THE DR/ITAT, MUMBAI. 6. GUARD FILE. TRUE COPY. BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI.