DCIT CC 35, MUMBAI V. PANKAJ M. PATEL, MUMBAI

ITA 4872/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 56280 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-12-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 28-12-2011
• Assessment Year: 2002-2003
• Appeal Filed On: 11-06-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: O P KANT
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH D, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH, A.M. AND SHRI V. DURGA RAO, J.M. ITA NO. 4872/MUM/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2002-03 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, APPELLAN T CENTRAL CIRCLE 35, R.NO. 104, FIRST FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MUMBAI 400 020. VS. PANKAJ M. PATEL, RESPONDENT PROP. M/S PERFECT TOOLS CORPORATION 51, BIBIJAN STREET, 1 ST FLOOR, MUMBAI 400 020. APPELLANT BY : MR. O.P. KANT RESPONDENT BY : MR. VIMAL PUNMIYA DATE OF HEARING : 28/12/2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : /12/2011 ORDER PER V. DURGA RAO, J.M.: THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE ORDER OF CIT(A)-41, MUMBAI, PASSED ON 23/03/2010 FOR THE ASS ESSMENT YEAR 2002-03. 2. WE HAVE HEARD THE ARGUMENTS OF BOTH THE SIDES AN D ALSO PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. WE FIND TH AT, AFTER GIVING APPEAL EFFECT, THE TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN THIS APP EAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS LESS THAN RS. 3 LAKHS AND THIS POSITION HAS NOT BEEN DISPUTED EVEN BY THE LEARNED DR. AS PER THE CBDT IN STRUCTION NO. 3 OF 2011 ISSUED ON 09/02/2011, THE MONETARY LIMIT FO R FILING OF AN APPEAL BY THE DEPARTMENT BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL HAS BE EN REVISED TO RS. 3 LAKHS. AS DECIDED BY THE CBDT, APPEALS SHALL NOT BE FILED BY THE ITA NO. 4872?MUM/10 MR. PANKAJ M. PATEL 2 DEPARTMENT IN CASES WHERE TAX EFFECT DOES NOT EXCEE D RS. 3 LAKHS. IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MADHUKAR INAMDAR (HUF) 318 ITR 149, THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT HAS HELD THAT CBDT INSTRUCTION FI XING ANY MONETARY LIMIT FOR FILING THE APPEAL WOULD APPLY EV EN FOR THE PENDING CASES. KEEPING IN VIEW THE SAID DECISION OF HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT AND THE BOARD INSTRUCTION NO. 3 OF 2011 DATED 09/02/2011, WE HOLD THAT THE PRESENT APPEAL FILED BY THE DEPARTMEN T INVOLVING TAX EFFECT OF LESS THAN 3 LAKHS IS NOT MAINTAINABLE AND THE SAME IS, THEREFORE, DISMISSED. 3. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSE D. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 28 TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2011 UPON CONCLUSION OF HEARING. SD/- SD/- (B. RAMAKOTAIAH) (V. DURG A RAO) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 28 TH DECEMBER, 2011 KV COPY TO:- 1) THE APPELLANT. 2) THE RESPONDENT. 3) THE CIT (A) CONCERNED. 4) THE CIT CONCERNED. 5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, C BENCH, I.T .A.T., MUMBAI. BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// ASST. REGISTRAR, I.T.A.T., MUMBAI.