ITO, New Delhi V. M/s C.S. Capital & Computer Services Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 4551/DEL/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3691 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-06-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 20-06-2011
• Assessment Year: 2000-2001
• Appeal Filed On: 13-10-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: Y KAKKAR
• Assessee Lawyers: MRS RANO JAIN
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH B NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.G. BANSAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO.4551/DEL/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2000-01 INCOME TAX OFFICER, VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, VS. M/S C.S. CAPITAL M/S C.S. CAPITAL M/S C.S. CAPITAL M/S C.S. CAPITAL & COMPUTER SER & COMPUTER SER & COMPUTER SER & COMPUTER SER- -- - WARD WARD WARD WARD- -- -3(2), 3(2), 3(2), 3(2), VICES LTD., 310, SEWAK CHAMBERS VICES LTD., 310, SEWAK CHAMBERS VICES LTD., 310, SEWAK CHAMBERS VICES LTD., 310, SEWAK CHAMBERS NEW DELHI NEW DELHI NEW DELHI NEW DELHI 2099/38, NAIWALA, KAROL BAGH, 2099/38, NAIWALA, KAROL BAGH, 2099/38, NAIWALA, KAROL BAGH, 2099/38, NAIWALA, KAROL BAGH, NEW DELHI NEW DELHI NEW DELHI NEW DELHI CROSS OBJECTION NO.387/D/2010 ( IN I.T.A. NO.4551/D/2010 ) ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2000-01 M/S C.S. CAPITAL & COMPUTER SERVICE M/S C.S. CAPITAL & COMPUTER SERVICE M/S C.S. CAPITAL & COMPUTER SERVICE M/S C.S. CAPITAL & COMPUTER SERVICES SS S VS. VS. VS. VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER INCOME TAX OFFICER INCOME TAX OFFICER INCOME TAX OFFICER LTD., 310, SEWAK CHAMBERS, 2099/38, WARD-3(2), NAIWALA, KAROL BAGH, NEW DELHI NEW DELHI PAN NO.AAACC 2826 K (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : MRS. RANO JAIN, CA DEPARTMENT BY : MS. Y. KAKKAR, SR. DR ORDER PER BENCH: THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US AGAINST THE ORDE R OF LEARNED CIT(A) DATED 26 TH JULY, 2010 PASSED FOR ASSESSMENT 2 YEAR 2000-01. ON RECEIPT OF NOTICE IN REVENUES A PPEAL, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED CROSS OBJECTION BEARING NO.387/D /2010. 2. THE GRIEVANCE OF THE REVENUE IS THAT LEARNED CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF `5,50,000/-. LEA RNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AT THE VERY OUT SET SUBMIT TED THAT TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL IS LESS T HAN `3 LACS. THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS NOT MAINTAINABLE IN TH E PRESENT FORM AS PER THE INSTRUCTIONS BEARING NO.3 DATED 9 TH FEB., 2011 ISSUED BY THE CBDT. SHE POINTED OUT THAT HON BLE DELHI HIGH COURT HAS CONSIDERED THIS ISSUE IN THE C ASE OF DELHI GOLF CLUB AND IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. DELHI RA CE CLUB IN I.T.A. NO.128/2008. THE HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT H AS OBSERVED IN ITS ORDER THAT LIMIT PROVIDED IN THE NE W INSTRUCTION FOR CHALLENGING THE ORDER OF CIT(A) WOU LD BE APPLICABLE IN THE PENDING APPEALS. SHE PLACED ON R ECORD COPY OF THE HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURTS ORDER AS WEL L AS COPY OF THE TRIBUNALS ORDER IN I.T.A. NO.2207/D/2009 WH EREIN TRIBUNAL HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE BY FOLLOWING THE HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURTS DECISION. 3. THE LEARNED DR ON THE OTHER HAND SUBMITTED THAT HONBLE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE O F CIT VS. VARINDER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY REPORTED IN 239 CTR P AGE 1 HAS HELD THAT INSTRUCTIONS ISSUED BY THE CBDT ON 9 TH FEBRUARY, 2011 IS PROSPECTIVE IN NATURE. THEY ARE NOT 3 APPLICABLE ON THE APPEALS FILED BEFORE THE ISSUANCE OF THE INSTRUCTIONS. 4. WE HAVE DULY CONSIDERED THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AN D GONE THROUGH THE RECORD CAREFULLY. IN THE INSTRUCT IONS ISSUED ON 9 TH FEBRUARY, 2011, THE CBDT HAS DIRECTED REVENUE AUTHORITIES NOT TO CHALLENGE ANY ORDER OF CIT(A) WH ERE TAX EFFECT BY VIRTUE OF SUCH ORDER IS LESS THAN `3 LACS , UNLESS THE CASE COMES WITHIN THE AMBIT OF SECTION PROVIDED IN THE INSTRUCTIONS. THE LEARNED DR HAS POINTED OUT THAT THESE INSTRUCTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE IN THE PRESENT APPE AL IN VIEW OF HONBLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURTS ORDER. HO WEVER, WE DO NOT CONCUR WITH THE CONTENTION OF LEARNED DR BECAUSE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT HAS APPLIED THESE INSTRUCTIONS ON THE PENDING APPEALS, IN THE CASE OF DELHI RACE CLUB AS WELL AS IN THE CASE OF M/S P.S. JAIN A ND COMPANY. COPIES OF BOTH THESE ORDERS ARE AVAILABLE ON THE RECORD. THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT FALL WIT HIN THE AMBIT OF EXCEPTIONS PROVIDED IN THE INSTRUCTIONS. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF HONBLE DELHI H IGH COURT WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS NO T MAINTAINABLE. CROSS OBJECTION NO.387/D/2010 5. LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PRESS T HE CROSS OBJECTION IN VIEW OF THE NON-MAINTAINABILITY OF REVENUES APPEAL. 4 6. IN RESULT, THE APPEAL AS WELL AS CROSS OBJECTION ARE DISMISSED. THIS ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 20.06.2011 SOON AFTER THE CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING . SD/- SD/- ( K.G. BANSAL ) ( RAJPAL YADAV ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DT. 20.06.2011. NS COPY FORWARDED TO:- 1. THE ASSESSEE. 2. THE DEPARTMENT. 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT (A)-, NEW DELHI. 5. THE DR, ITAT, LOKNAYAK BHAWAN, KHAN MARKET, NEW DELHI. TRUE COPY. BY ORDER (ITAT, NEW DELHI).