ACIT, UDAIPUR V. M/s. Mewar Polytex Limited, UDAIPUR

ITA 428/JODH/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7812 (ITAT-JODHPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-08-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 06-08-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE SHRI HARI OM MARATHA , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K.SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 4 28 / J ODH / 20 1 4 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2 0 1 0 - 11 ACIT, VS. M/S. MEWAR POLYTEX L IMITED , CIRCLE - 1 207 - A, NEWAR INDUSTRIAL AREA, MADARI, UDAIPUR . PAN NO. AAACM 9922 A (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) A SSESSEE B Y : NONE DEPARTMENT B Y : SHRI N.A. JOSHI D.R. DATE OF H EARING : 11 . 0 8 .201 4 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11 . 08 . 201 4 ORDER PER N.K. SAINI , A .M. TH IS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT (A) , UDAIPUR , DATED 16 . 0 5 .20 1 4 F OR A.Y 20 1 0 - 11 . 2 2. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING , LD. D.R., ALTHOUGH SUPPORTED TH E ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER , BUT COULD NOT CONTROVERT TH IS FACT THAT TAX EFFECT IN THIS APPEAL IS LESS THAN RS. 4 ,00,000/ - . 3 . AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF LEARNED D.R. AND THE MATERIAL ON RECORD, IT IS NOTICED THAT SECTION 268A HAS BEEN INS ERTED BY THE FINANCE ACT, 2008 WITH RETRO SPECTIVE EFFECT FROM 01/04/99. THE PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN SECTION 268A READ AS UNDER: 268A. (1) THE BOARD MAY, FROM TIME TO TIME, ISSUE ORDERS, INSTRUCTIONS OR DIRECTIONS TO OTHER INCOME - TAX AUTHORITIES, FIXING S UCH MONETARY LIMITS AS IT MAY DEEM FIT, FOR THE PURPOSE OF REGULATING FILING OF APPEAL OR APPLICATION FOR REFERENCE BY ANY INCOME - TAX AUTHORITY UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THIS CHAPTER. (2) WHERE, IN PURSUANCE OF THE ORDERS, INSTRUCTIONS OR DIRECTIONS ISSUED UNDER SUB - SECTION (1), AN INCOME - TAX AUTHORITY HAS NOT FILED ANY APPEAL OR APPLICATION FOR REFERENCE ON ANY ISSUE IN THE CASE OF AN ASSESSEE FOR ANY ASSESSMENT YEAR, IT SHALL NOT PRECLUDE SUCH AUTHORITY FROM FILING AN APPEAL OR APPLICATION FOR REFERENCE ON THE SAME ISSUE IN THE CASE OF ( A ) THE SAME ASSESSEE FOR ANY OTHER ASSESSMENT YEAR; OR ( B ) ANY OTHER ASSESSEE FOR THE SAME OR ANY OTHER ASSESSMENT YEAR. 3 (3) NOTWITHSTANDING THAT NO APPEAL OR APPLICATION FOR REFERENCE HAS BEEN FILED BY AN INCOME - TAX A UTHORITY PURSUANT TO THE ORDERS OR INSTRUCTIONS OR DIRECTIONS ISSUED UNDER SUB - SECTION (1), IT SHALL NOT BE LAWFUL FOR AN ASSESSEE, BEING A PARTY IN ANY APPEAL OR REFERENCE, TO CONTEND THAT THE INCOME - TAX AUTHORITY HAS ACQUIESCED IN THE DECISION ON THE DIS PUTED ISSUE BY NOT FILING AN APPEAL OR APPLICATION FOR REFERENCE IN ANY CASE. (4) THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL OR COURT, HEARING SUCH APPEAL OR REFERENCE, SHALL HAVE REGARD TO THE ORDERS, INSTRUCTIONS OR DIRECTIONS ISSUED UNDER SUB - SECTION (1) AND THE CIRCUMSTA NCES UNDER WHICH SUCH APPEAL OR APPLICATION FOR REFERENCE WAS FILED OR NOT FILED IN RESPECT OF ANY CASE. (5) EVERY ORDER, INSTRUCTION OR DIRECTION WHICH HAS BEEN ISSUED BY THE BOARD FIXING MONETARY LIMITS FOR FILING AN APPEAL OR APPLICATION FOR REFERENCE SHALL BE DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN ISSUED UNDER SUB - SECTION (1) AND THE PROVISIONS OF SUB - SECTIONS (2), (3) AND (4) SHALL APPLY ACCORDINGLY. ] 4 . IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE THAT THE BOARDS INSTRUCTION OR DIRECTIONS ISSUED TO THE OTHER INCOME - TAX AUTHORITIES ARE B INDING ON THOSE AUTHORITIES, THEREFORE, THE DEPARTMENT OUGHT NOT TO HAVE FILED THE APPEAL IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE MENTIONED SECTION 268A SINCE THE TAX EFFECT IN THE INSTANT CASE IS LESS THAN THE AMOUNT PRESCRIBED FOR NOT FILING THE APPEAL. 4 5 . IT IS NOTICED T HAT THE CBDT HAS ISSUED INSTRUCTION NO. 5 OF 2014 DATED 1 0.0 7.2014 , BY WHICH THE CBDT HAS REV ISED THE MONETARY LIMIT TO RS. 4 ,00,000/ - FOR FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 6 . KEEPING IN VIEW THE CBDT INSTRUCTION NO. 5 OF 201 4 DATED 1 0.0 7 .201 4 AND ALS O THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 268A OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE REVENUE SHOULD NOT HAVE FILED THE INSTANT APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. WHILE TAKING SUCH A VIEW, WE ARE FORTIFIED BY THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS OF HON'BLE PUNJAB & HARYANA H IGH COURT : - 1. CIT V OSCAR LABORATORIES P. LTD (2010) 324 ITR 115 (P&H) 2. CIT V ABINASH GUPTA (2010) 327 ITR 619 (P&H) 3. CIT V VARINDERA CONSTRUCTION CO. (2011) 331 ITR 449 (P&H)(FB) 7 . SIMILARLY , THE HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V. DELHI RAC E CLUB LTD. IN ITA NO.128/2008, ORDER DATED 03.03.2011 BY FOLLOWING THE EARLIER ORDER DATED 02.08.2010 IN ITA NO.179/1991 IN THE CASE OF CIT DELHI - III V. M/S. P.S. JAIN & 5 CO. HELD THAT SUCH CIRCULAR WOULD ALSO BE APPLICABLE TO PENDING CASES. 8 . FROM THE RATIO LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT, IT IS CLEAR THAT THE INSTRUCTIONS ISSUED IN THE CIRCULARS BY CBDT ARE APPLICABLE FOR PENDING CASES ALSO. THEREFORE, BY KEEPING IN VIEW THE RATIO LAID DOWN IN THE AFORESAID REFERRED TO CASES, WE ARE OF THE CONSI DERED VIEW THAT INSTRUCTION NO.5/14 DATED 1 0.0 7 .201 4 ISSUED BY THE CBDT ARE APPLICABLE FOR THE PENDING CASES ALSO AND IN THE SAID INSTRUCTIONS, MONETARY TAX LIMIT FOR NOT FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE ITAT IS RS. 4 .00 LAKH S. 9 . IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WITHOUT GOING INTO MERITS OF THE CASE, WE DISMISS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE. 1 0 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE STAND S DISMISSED . ORDER PRON OUNCED IN THE COURT ON 11 .0 8 .201 4 . S D/ - SD/ - ( HARI OM MARATHA ) (N.K.SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACC OUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 11 TH AUGUST , 2014 6 VR / - COPY TO: THE APPELLANT THE RESPONDENT THE CIT BY ORDER THE CIT(A) THE DR SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY , ITAT, JODHPUR