IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES, D, MUMBAI BEFORE S/SHRI D.K.AGARWAL (JM) AND B.RAMAKOTAIAH (A .M ) ITA NO.4801/MUM/2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR:2006-07) INCOME TAX OFFICER 4(1)(1), ROOM NO.678, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K.ROAD, MUMBAI-400020 DIPCHAND LALLUBHAI TASWALA, PG-9, GROUND FLOOR, ROTUNDA, B.S.MARG, MUMBAI-400023. PAN: AABPT2823M APPELLANT V/S RESPONDENT DATE OF HEARING : 17.8.2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 17.8.2011 APPELLANT BY : SHRI G.K.NAI R RESPONDENT BY : SHRI MITEN NIPUN TASWAL A O R D E R PER D.K.AGARWAL (JM) THIS APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 17.3.2010 PASSED BY THE LE ARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. 2. THE GROUNDS TAKEN BY THE REVENUE READ AS UNDER : 1 ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING THE P ENALTY LEVIED UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE OFFERED LTCG ONLY AFTER WHE N WAS ASKED TO EXPLAIN THE DISCREPANCY AND IF THE PARTICULARS OF ACCOUNT HAD NOT BEEN VERIFIED, THE C ORRECT TOTAL INCOME COULD NOT HAVE BEEN DETERMINED WHIC H ITA NO.4801/MUM/2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR:2006-07) 2 CLEARLY SHOWS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS WILLFULLY AND CONSCIOUSLY FILED INACCURATE PARTICULAR OF INCOME; 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) IS CONTRARY TO LAW TO BE SET ASIDE AND THAT OF THE AO BE RESTORED. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, IT WAS OBSERVED THAT THE TAX EFFECT ON THE ABOVE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS RS.2,51,920/- BEING LESS THAN THE MONETARY LIMIT OF RS.3,00,000/- FIXED BY THE CBDT. THE LEARNED DEPART MENTAL REPRESENTATIVE DID NOT DISPUTE ON THE SAID FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE. 4 THAT BEING SO AND IN TERMS OF THE RECENT CBDT INSTRUCTION NO. 3 OF 2011 DATED 9 TH FEBRUARY, 2011 REPORTED IN (2011) 332 ITR 1 (STATUTES) AND KEEPING IN VIEW THE RATIO OF THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V. MADHUKAR K. INAMDAR (HUF) (2009) 318 ITR 148(BOM), WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT THE REVISED MONETARY LIMIT IN THE CIRCULAR DATED MAY 15, 2008 W OULD BE APPLICABLE FOR ALL PENDING APPEALS AND ALSO THE CON SISTENT VIEW OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCHES OF THE TRIBUNAL, W E ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE DEPARTMENT SHOULD NOT HAVE FILED THE APPEAL AND ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE REVENUES APPEAL STANDS DISM ISSED AS NOT MAINTAINABLE. ITA NO.4801/MUM/2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR:2006-07) 3 ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 17.8.2011. SD SD (B.RAMAKOTAIAH ) (D.K.AGARWAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED 17 TH AUGUST, 2011 SRL: COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT CONCERNED 4. CIT(A) CONCERNED 5. DR CONCERNED BENCH 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER TRUE COPY ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI ITA NO.4801/MUM/2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR:2006-07) 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES, D, MUMBAI BEFORE S/SHRI D.K.AGARWAL (JM) AND B.RAMAKOTAIAH (A .M ) ITA NO.4779/MUM/2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR:2006-07) SHRI RAJENDRA K.GANDHI, D/5, GREEN PARK, OLD NAGARDAS ROAD, ANDHERI (EAST), MUMBAI-400069. PAN: AHEPG0311M INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 15(2)(1), MATRU MANDIR, NANA CHOWK, MUMBAI-400007 APPELLANT V/S RESPONDENT CORRINGENDUM IN THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ITAT, MUMBAI BENCHES D MUMBAI IN THE ABOVE APPEAL IN ITA NO.4797/MUM/201 0 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 DATED 17.8.2011, AT PAGE N O.1 FOR APPELLANT BY NONE AND RESPONDENT BY SHRI G.K.N AIR READ APPELLANT BY NONE AND RESPONDENT BY SHRI C.G.K.NAIR SD SD (B. RAMAKOTAIAH ) (D.K.AGARWAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED 30 TH AUG, 2011 SRL COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT CONCERNED 4. CIT(A) CONCERNED 5. DR CONCERNED BENCH 6. GUARD FILE. ITA NO.4801/MUM/2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR:2006-07) 5 BY ORDER TRUE COPY ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI