Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-6, Kanpur V. M/s Singh Technoinfra Pvt. Ltd., Kanpur

ITA 428/LKW/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3962 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-10-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 18-10-2016
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 21-07-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH B, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI P. K. BANSAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 428 /LKW/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2012-13 DY.C.I.T. - 6, KANPUR. VS. M/S SINGH TECHNOINFRA PVT. LTD., 84/54, G. T. ROAD, KANPUR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SHRI AMIT NIGAM, D. R. RESPONDENT BY SHRI RAKESH GARG, ADVOCATE DATE OF HEARING 18/10/2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 1 9 / 1 0 /2016 O R D E R PER P. K. BANSAL, A.M. THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A)-II, KANPUR DATED 14/03/2016 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-2013. 2. AT THE VERY OUTSET, WE NOTED THAT IN THIS CASE THE TAX EFFECT ON THE INCOME UNDER DISPUTE IS LESS THAN RS.10 LAC. WE FURTHER NO TED THAT THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES VIDE CIRCULAR NO. 21/2015 DATED 10 TH DECEMBER, 2015 FILE NO.279 OF MISC. 142/2007 ITJ (PT) HAS ISSUED THE DIRECTION IN SUPERSESSION OF THE INSTRUCTION NO.5/2014 DATED 10/07/2014 IN PURSUANCE WITH THE POWER INTERESTED U/S. 268A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT THAT NO APPEAL SHOU LD BE FILED BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL IN CASE TAX EFFECT DOES NOT EXCEED RS.10 L AC. THE TAX EFFECT IN THIS REGARD MEANS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TAX ON THE TOTAL INCOME ASSESSED AND THE TAX THAT WHAT HAVE BEEN CHARGEABLE HAD SUCH TOT AL INCOME BEEN REDUCED BY THE AMOUNT OF INCOME IN RESPECT OF ISSUES AGAINST W HICH APPEAL IS INTENDED TO BE FILED. THIS CIRCULAR FURTHER STATES THAT TAX WILL N OT INCLUDE ANY INTEREST THEREON THE 2 CHARGEABILITY OF INTEREST ITSELF IS IN DISPUTE. WE FURTHER NOTED THAT UNDER PARAGRAPH 10 WHICH IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER, IT HAS BEEN MENTIO NED IN THE CIRCULAR THAT THIS INSTRUCTION WILL APPLY EVEN TO THE PENDING APPEALS. 10. THIS INSTRUCTION WILL APPLY RETROSPECTIVELY TO PENDING APPEALS AND APPEALS TO BE FILED HENCEFORTH IN HIGH COURTS/T RIBUNALS. PENDING APPEALS BELOW THE SPECIFIED TAX LIMITS IN PARA 3 AB OVE MAY BE WITHDRAWN/NOT PRESSED. APPEALS BEFORE THE SUPREME C OURT WILL BE GOVERNED BY THE INSTRUCTIONS ON THIS SUBJECT, OPERA TIVE AT THE TIME WHEN SUCH APPEAL WAS FILED. 3. IN THE IMPUGNED CASE, WE NOTED THAT THE TAX EFFE CT ON THE ISSUE UNDER DISPUTE DOES NOT EXCEED RS.10 LAC. IN VIEW OF THIS FACT AS PER THE INSTRUCTION, THE REVENUE IS NOT SUPPOSED TO PRESS THE APPEAL. WE, TH EREFORE, DISMISS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IN LIMINE WITHOUT GOING INTO T HE MERITS OF THE CASE AS IN OUR OPINION THE CIRCULARS ISSUED BY CBDT ARE BINDING ON THE DEPARTMENTAL OFFICERS IN VIEW OF THE PROVISION OF SECTION 268A(1) OF THE ACT . THE SAID VIEW HAS BEEN TAKEN BY HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF NAVNEET LAL ZAVERI VS. AAC 56 ITR 198 (SC). WE ACCORDINGLY DISMISS THE APPEAL FILED BY TH E REVENUE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE STANDS DISMISSED. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 19/10/2016) SD/. SD/. (ABY T. VARKEY ) ( P. K. BANSAL ) JUDICIAL MEMBER A CCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED:19/10/2016 *SINGH COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR