Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Lucknow V. M/s U.P Project Corp. Ltd., Lucknow

ITA 478/LKW/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2022 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-10-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 09-07-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: Y P SRIVASTA VA
• Assessee Lawyers: K R RASTOGI
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCHES : B LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUD ICIAL MEMBER ITA NO: 478/LKW/2015 AY : - 2005-06 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VS. M/S . U.P. PROJECT CORP. LTD. RANGE-6, P.K. COMPLEX GOMTI BARRAGE, RAJA RAM MOHAN RAI MARG, GOMTI NAGAR, LUCKNOW-226010 LUCKNOW - 226001 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI Y.P. SRIVASTAVA, DR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI K.R. RASTOGI, CA DATE OF HEARING : 20.8.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30.10.2015 O R D E R PER SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE FOR THE ASSTT. Y EAR 2005-06 IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). THE GROUND OF APPEAL OF THE RE VENUE IS AS UNDER:- (I) THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN RESTRIC TING THE DISALLOWANCE OF PRIOR PERIOD EXPENSES TO RS. 108259 .59 AS AGAINST RS. 12,57,146/- WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FA CT THAT IN MERCANTILE SYSTEM IN ACCOUNTING PRIOR PERIOD EXPENS ES ARE NOT ADMISSIBLE. 2. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AT THE OUTSET SUBMITT ED THAT THE TAX EFFECT ON THE DISPUTED ADDITION COMES TO LESS THAN 4 LACS, THE M ONETARY LIMIT BY THE CBDT FOR FILING APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AND THEREFORE THE PRESENT APPEAL OF THE REVENUE WAS NOT MAINTAINABLE. LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT AT THE TIME OF FILING OF APPEAL THE LIMIT ITA NO.478/LKW/ 2015 DCIT VS. M /S. UP PROJECT CORP.LTD. 2 OF TAX EFFECT WAS RS. 3 LACS AND THEREFORE THE APPE AL WAS RIGHTLY PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE. 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. W E FIND THAT THE DISPUTED TAX EFFECT IN THIS CASE COMES TO LESS THAN RS. 4 LACS, THE MON ETARY LIMITS FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT FOR FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNA L. IT IS NOW WELL SETTLED THAT THE REVISED MONETARY LIMIT FOR MAINTAINABILITY OF APPEA L BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL SHALL BE APPLICABLE TO ALL THE PENDING APPEALS BEFORE THE TR IBUNAL. ACCORDINGLY, WE HOLD THAT THE PRESENT APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE IS NOT MAINTAINABLE AND ACCORDINGLY IS DISMISSED IN LIMINE. 4. IN THE RESULT APPEAL FILED BY THE REVEN UE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30 TH OCTOBER, 2015. SD/- SD/- (A.K. GARODIA) (SU DHANSHU SRIVASTAVA ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: THE 30 TH OCTOBER. 2015 VEENA COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER DY. REGISTRAR SL. NO. DESCRIPTION DATE 1. DATE OF DICTATION BY THE AUTHOR 19.10.2015 ITA NO.478/LKW/ 2015 DCIT VS. M /S. UP PROJECT CORP.LTD. 3 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 19.10 .2015 3. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER 4. DRAFT APPROVED BY THE SECOND MEMBER 5. DATE OF APPROVED ORDER COMES TO THE SR. PS 6. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDER 7. DATE OF FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER