DCIT, New Delhi V. Sh. U.K. Bose, Lucknow

ITA 5066/DEL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5882 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 year(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-09-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Next Hearing Date: 08-12-2015
• Assessment Year: 1996-1997
• Appeal Filed On: 02-09-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANJOG KAPOOR
• Assessee Lawyers: HARDEEP SINGH
• Keywords: Tax effect
• Section: 271(1)(c); 254(2)

Judgement Text

ITA NO.- 5064/DEL/2013 AND OTHERS. U.K. BOSE. PAGE 1 OF 8 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH: A: NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO:- 5064/DEL/2013 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR: 1994-95) DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-6, NEW DELHI. VS. SH. U.K. BOSE, 1, KAPOORTHALA COMPLEX, ALIGANJ, LUCKNOW (UP). PAN NO: AFSPB7277H APPELLANT RESPONDENT C.O. NO.-38/DEL/2014 ARISING FROM ITA NO:- 5064/DEL/2013 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR: 1994-95) SH. U.K. BOSE, 1, KAPOORTHALA COMPLEX, ALIGANJ, LUCKNOW (UP). VS. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-6, NEW DELHI. PAN NO: AFSPB7277H APPELLANT RESPONDENT ITA NO:- 5065/DEL/2013 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR: 1995-96) DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-6, NEW DELHI. VS. SH. U.K. BOSE, 1, KAPOORTHALA COMPLEX, ALIGANJ, LUCKNOW (UP). PAN NO: AFSPB7277H APPELLANT RESPONDENT ITA NO.- 5064/DEL/2013 AND OTHERS. U.K. BOSE. PAGE 2 OF 8 C.O. NO.-39/DEL/2014 ARISING FROM ITA NO:- 5065/DEL/2013 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR: 1995-96) SH. U.K. BOSE, 1, KAPOORTHALA COMPLEX, ALIGANJ, LUCKNOW (UP). VS. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-6, NEW DELHI. PAN NO: AFSPB7277H APPELLANT RESPONDENT ITA NO:- 5066/DEL/2013 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR: 1996-97) DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-6, NEW DELHI. VS. SH. U.K. BOSE, 1, KAPOORTHALA COMPLEX, ALIGANJ, LUCKNOW (UP). PAN NO: AFSPB7277H APPELLANT RESPONDENT C.O. NO.-40/DEL/2014 ARISING FROM ITA NO:- 5066/DEL/2013 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR: 1996-97) SH. U.K. BOSE, 1, KAPOORTHALA COMPLEX, ALIGANJ, LUCKNOW (UP). VS. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-6, NEW DELHI. PAN NO: AFSPB7277H APPELLANT RESPONDENT REVENUE BY : SHRI SANJOG KAPOOR, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI DINESH VERMA, ADV. AND SHRI HARDEEP SINGH, CA ITA NO.- 5064/DEL/2013 AND OTHERS. U.K. BOSE. PAGE 3 OF 8 CONSOLIDATED ORDER PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, AM (A) THE AFOREMENTIONED APPEALS BY REVENUE AND CROSS OB JECTIONS BY SHRI U.K. BOSE, ARE TAKEN UP TOGETHER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE A ND BREVITY AND THESE APPEALS ARE HEREBY DISPOSED OFF THROUGH THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER ; BECAUSE, IN THESE APPEALS THE TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN THE MONETARY LIMIT OF RS. 50,00 ,000/- FIXED BY THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES (CBDT, FOR SHORT) IN ITS CIRCULAR NO . 17/2019 DATED 08.08.2019. GROUNDS TAKEN IN THESE APPEALS OF REVENUE ARE AS UNDER: ITA NO.- 5064/DEL/2013 ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN:- 1. THE CIT(A) IS NOT CORRECT IN LAW AND FACTS 2. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE L D. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE PENALTY OF RS. 22,56,100/- U/S 271( 1)(C) OF I.T. ACT LEVIED ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST ON BO RROWED CAPITAL USED FOR INVESTMENT IN SHARE CAPITAL AS EXPENDITURE . 3. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER OR AMEN D ANY/ALL GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE OR DURING THE COURSE OF THE HEARIN G OF THE APPEAL. C.O. NO. 38/DEL/2014 1. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FAC TS IN REJECTING THE GROUND OF APPEAL FILED BY THE APPELLANT WHEREIN IT WAS PLEADED THAT THE ORDER PASSED IN BARRED BY LIMITATION AND AS SUC H VOID AB-INITIO AND BAD IN LAW. 2. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACT S AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN HOLDING THAT THE ORDER OF PENALTY PA SSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS TENABLE IN LAW AS THE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS ITA NO.- 5064/DEL/2013 AND OTHERS. U.K. BOSE. PAGE 4 OF 8 STOOD REVIVED IN LIGHT OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 275(1A) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. 3. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER AM END OR WITHDRAWN WHY OR ALL THE GROUNDS OF CROSS-OBJECTION ON OR BEF ORE THE DATE OF HEARING. ITA NO.- 5065/DEL/2013 ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN:- 1. THE CIT(A) IS NOT CORRECT IN LAW AND FACTS 2. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE L D. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE PENALTY OF RS. 12,51,400/- LEVIED B Y AO U/S 271(1)(C) OF I.T. ACT, 1961 FOR FURNISHING INACCURATE PARTICU LARS OF INCOME. 3. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER OR AMEN D ANY/ALL GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE OR DURING THE COURSE OF THE HEARIN G OF THE APPEAL. C.O. NO. 39/DEL/2014 1. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FAC TS IN REJECTING THE GROUND OF APPEAL FILED BY THE APPELLANT WHEREIN IT WAS PLEADED THAT THE ORDER PASSED IN BARRED BY LIMITATION AND AS SUC H VOID AB-INITIO AND BAD IN LAW. 2. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACT S AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN HOLDING THAT THE ORDER OF PENALTY PA SSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS TENABLE IN LAW AS THE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS STOOD REVIVED IN LIGHT OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 275(1A) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. 3. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER AM END OR WITHDRAWN WHY OR ALL THE GROUNDS OF CROSS-OBJECTION ON OR BEF ORE THE DATE OF HEARING. ITA NO.- 5065/DEL/2013 ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN:- ITA NO.- 5064/DEL/2013 AND OTHERS. U.K. BOSE. PAGE 5 OF 8 1. THE CIT(A) IS NOT CORRECT IN LAW AND FACTS 2. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE L D. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE PENALTY OF RS. 22,77,000/- LEVIED B Y AO U/S 271(1)(C) OF I.T. ACT, 1961 FOR FURNISHING INACCURATE PARTICU LARS OF INCOME. 3. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER OR AMEN D ANY/ALL GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE OR DURING THE COURSE OF THE HEARIN G OF THE APPEAL. C.O. NO. 40/DEL/2014 1. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FAC TS IN REJECTING THE GROUND OF APPEAL FILED BY THE APPELLANT WHEREIN IT WAS PLEADED THAT THE ORDER PASSED IN BARRED BY LIMITATION AND AS SUC H VOID AB-INITIO AND BAD IN LAW. 2. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACT S AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN HOLDING THAT THE ORDER OF PENALTY PA SSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS TENABLE IN LAW AS THE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS STOOD REVIVED IN LIGHT OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 275(1A) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. 3. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER AM END OR WITHDRAWN WHY OR ALL THE GROUNDS OF CROSS-OBJECTION ON OR BEF ORE THE DATE OF HEARING. (A.1) DURING APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS IN INCOME TAX APPELLAT E TRIBUNAL (ITAT, FOR SHORT), A WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS WAS FILED, VIDE LETTE R DATED 09/09/2019, RELEVANT PORTION OF WHICH IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER: SEPTEMBER 09, 2019 THE REGISTRAR, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, LOKNAYAK BHAWAN, KHAN MARKET, NEW DELHI-110003 SUBJECT: DISMISSAL OF APPEAL ON TAX EFFECT-U.K BOSE ITA NO.- 5064/DEL/2013 AND OTHERS. U.K. BOSE. PAGE 6 OF 8 DEAR SIR, WITH REFERENCE TO SUBJECT MATTER, WE WOULD LIKE TO APPRISE YOU THAT THE APPEALS MENTIONED HEREUNDER AND BELONGING TO ASSESS EE APPEARED TO FALL IN TAX EFFECT LESS THAN RS. 50 LACS AS MENTIONED IN THE CB DT CIRCULAR NO. 17/2019 DATED 08.08.2019. A.Y. APPEAL NO. U/S BENCH TAX EFFECT 1994 - 95 5064/D/13 271(1)(C) A 22,77,000 1995 - 96 5065/D/13 271(1)(C) A 12,51,400 1996 - 97 5066/D/13 271(1)(C) A 22,77,000 YOU ARE REQUESTED TO TAKE NECESSARY ACTION IN ORDER TO REQUEST FOR DISPOSAL OF SUCH APPEAL ON APPROPRIATE BENCH. THANKS IN ADVANCE FOR YOUR NECESSARY CO-OPERATION I N THIS MATTER. (A.2) COPY OF THE AFORESAID LETTER DATED 09/09/2019 WAS ALSO SENT TO THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (LD. DR, FOR SHORT). (B) AT THE OUTSET, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE BR OUGHT TO OUR NOTICE, AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THAT TAX EFFECT IN THESE APPEALS FILED BY REVENUE IS BELOW RS. 50,00,000/-. BOTH SIDES, [REPRESENTATIVES OF REVENUE AND THE ASS ESSEE] WERE IN AGREEMENT, AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE US, THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN T HE PRESENT APPEALS ARE BELOW RS. 50,00,000/-. VIDE RECENT CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 17/2019 DATED 08.08.2019 READ WITH EARLIER CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 3 OF 2018, DATED 11.07.2018, MIN IMUM THRESHOLD LIMIT OF TAX EFFECT FOR FILING OF APPEALS BY REVENUE IN INCOME TAX APPE LLATE TRIBUNAL HAS BEEN ENHANCED TO RS. 50,00,000/-. IN A SUBSEQUENT CLARIFICATION ISS UED BY CBDT VIDE F.NO. 279/MISC/M- 93/2018-ITJ, DATED 20/08/2019, IT HAS BEEN CLARIFIE D BY CBDT THAT THE AFORESAID REVISED MONETARY LIMIT IS ALSO APPLICABLE TO ALL PENDING AP PEALS IN ITAT. HAVING REGARD TO THE AFORESAID, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITT ED THAT THE APPEALS WERE NOT ITA NO.- 5064/DEL/2013 AND OTHERS. U.K. BOSE. PAGE 7 OF 8 MAINTAINABLE. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ALS O SUBMITTED THAT CROSS OBJECTIONS VIDE CO NUMBERS 38/DEL/2014, 39/DEL/2014 AND 40/DEL /2014 BECOME INFRUCTUOUS ON DISMISSAL OF THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS. ACCORDINGLY , ALL THE AFORESAID APPEALS OF REVENUE ARE DISMISSED BEING NON MAINTAINABLE AND AL L THE AFORESAID CROSS OBJECTIONS ARE DISMISSED BEING INFRUCTUOUS HAVING REGARD TO AF ORESAID CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 17/2019 DATED 08.08.2019 READ WITH AFORESAID CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 3 OF 2018 IN THE LIGHT OF AFORESAID CLARIFICATION DATED 20/08/2019. (C) BEFORE WE PART, WE EXPRESSLY CLARIFY THAT REVEN UE WILL BE AT LIBERTY TO APPROACH INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL U/S 254(2) O F INCOME TAX ACT, 1961; SEEKING RESTORATION OF ONE OR MORE OF THESE APPEALS IF IT IS FOUND THAT APPEAL OF REVENUE IS NOT COVERED BY AFORESAID CBDT CIRCULA RS DATED 08.08.2019 AND 11.07.2018. (D) IN THE RESULT, THESE THREE APPEALS FILED BY REVENUE ARE DISMISSED BEING NOT MAINTAINABLE AND THE CORRESPONDING THREE CROSS OBJE CTIONS FILED BY ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED BEING INFRUCTUOUS. OUR DECISION WAS ORAL LY PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT AFTER CONCLUSION OF HEARING ON THE DATE OF HEARING. NOW THIS DETAILED WRITTEN ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 19-09-2019. SD/- SD/- (H.S. SIDHU) (ANADEE NAT H MISSHRA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEM BER DATED: 19-09-2019 POOJA/- ITA NO.- 5064/DEL/2013 AND OTHERS. U.K. BOSE. PAGE 8 OF 8 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI DATE OF DICTATION DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE OTHER MEMBER DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. PS/PS DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR. PS/PS DATE ON WHICH THE FINAL ORDER IS UPLOADED ON THE WEBSITE OF ITAT DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER DATE OF DISPATCH OF THE ORDER