ITO, BHILWARA V. M/s. RSWM Ltd., BHILWARA

ITA 524/JODH/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7901 (ITAT-JODHPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-09-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 20-09-2012
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 04-11-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: G R KOKANI
• Assessee Lawyers: PRAFUL KHURANA
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE SHRI HARI OM MARATHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K.SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 524/JU/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER VS. M/S RSWM LTD TDS KHARIGRAM, GULABPURA BHILWARA DIST BHILWARA (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI PRAFUL KHURANA DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI G.R. KOKANI, DR DATE OF HEARING : 20.09.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 20.09.2012 ORDER PER HARI OM MARATHA, J.M. THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINS T THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A), AJMER, DATED 27.08.2010 FOR A. Y 2009-10. 2 2. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN THIS APPEAL IS LESS THAN THE AMOUNT PRESCRIBED BY THE CBDT WHERE DEPARTMENT OUGHT NOT TO HAVE FILED THE APPEAL . 3. THE LD. D.R. ALTHOUGH SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER BUT COULD NOT CONTROVERT THE AFOR ESAID FACT THAT TAX EFFECT IN THIS APPEAL IS LESS THAN RS.3,00 ,000/-. 4. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PA RTIES AND THE MATERIAL ON RECORD, IT IS NOTICED THAT SECTION 268A HAS BEEN INSERTED BY THE FINANCE ACT, 2008 WITH RETROSP ECTIVE EFFECT FROM 01/04/99. THE PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN SECTION 268A READ AS UNDER: 268A. (1) THE BOARD MAY, FROM TIME TO TIME, ISSUE ORDERS, INSTRUCTIONS OR DIRECTIONS TO OTHER INCOME- TAX AUTHORITIES, FIXING SUCH MONETARY LIMITS AS IT MAY DEEM FIT, FOR THE PURPOSE OF REGULATING FILING OF APPEAL OR APPLICATION FOR REFERENCE BY ANY INCOME-TAX AUTHORITY UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THIS CHAPTER. (2) WHERE, IN PURSUANCE OF THE ORDERS, INSTRUCTIONS OR DIRECTIONS ISSUED UNDER SUB-SECTION (1), AN INCOME-TAX AUTHORITY HAS NOT FILED ANY APPEAL OR 3 APPLICATION FOR REFERENCE ON ANY ISSUE IN THE CASE OF AN ASSESSEE FOR ANY ASSESSMENT YEAR, IT SHALL NOT PRECLUDE SUCH AUTHORITY FROM FILING AN APPEAL OR APPLICATION FOR REFERENCE ON THE SAME ISSUE IN THE CASE OF (A) THE SAME ASSESSEE FOR ANY OTHER ASSESSMENT YEAR; OR (B) ANY OTHER ASSESSEE FOR THE SAME OR ANY OTHER ASSESSMENT YEAR. (3) NOTWITHSTANDING THAT NO APPEAL OR APPLICATION FOR REFERENCE HAS BEEN FILED BY AN INCOME-TAX AUTHORITY PURSUANT TO THE ORDERS OR INSTRUCTIONS OR DIRECTIONS ISSUED UNDER SUB-SECTION (1), IT SHALL N OT BE LAWFUL FOR AN ASSESSEE, BEING A PARTY IN ANY APPEAL OR REFERENCE, TO CONTEND THAT THE INCOME- TAX AUTHORITY HAS ACQUIESCED IN THE DECISION ON THE DISPUTED ISSUE BY NOT FILING AN APPEAL OR APPLICATI ON FOR REFERENCE IN ANY CASE. (4) THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL OR COURT, HEARING SUCH APPEAL OR REFERENCE, SHALL HAVE REGARD TO THE ORDERS, INSTRUCTIONS OR DIRECTIONS ISSUED UNDER SUB - SECTION (1) AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH SUCH APPEAL OR APPLICATION FOR REFERENCE WAS FILED OR NO T FILED IN RESPECT OF ANY CASE. (5) EVERY ORDER, INSTRUCTION OR DIRECTION WHICH HAS BEEN ISSUED BY THE BOARD FIXING MONETARY LIMITS FOR FILING AN APPEAL OR APPLICATION FOR REFERENCE SHALL BE DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN ISSUED UNDER SUB-SECTION (1) AND THE PROVISIONS OF SUB-SECTIONS (2), (3) AND (4) SHALL APPLY ACCORDINGLY.] 4 5. IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE THAT THE BOARDS INSTRUCTIO N OR DIRECTIONS ISSUED TO THE OTHER INCOME-TAX AUTHORITI ES ARE BINDING ON THOSE AUTHORITIES, THEREFORE, THE DEPART MENT OUGHT NOT TO HAVE FILED THE APPEAL IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE M ENTIONED SECTION 268A SINCE THE TAX EFFECT IN THE INSTANT CA SE IS LESS THAN THE AMOUNT PRESCRIBED FOR NOT FILING THE APPEA L. 6. IT IS NOTICED THAT THE CBDT HAS ISSUED INSTRUCTI ON NO.3 OF 2011 DATED 09.02.2011, BY WHICH THE CBDT HAS REVISE D THE MONETARY LIMIT TO RS. 3,00,000/- FOR FILING THE AP PEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 7. KEEPING IN VIEW THE CBDT INSTRUCTION NO.3 OF 201 1 DATED 09.02.2011 AND ALSO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 268A OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE REVENUE SHOULD NOT HAVE FILED THE INSTANT APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. WHILE TAKING SUCH A VIEW, WE ARE FORTIFIED BY THE FOLLOWI NG DECISIONS OF HON'BLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT :- 1. CIT V OSCAR LABORATORIES P. LTD (2010) 324 ITR 115 (P&H) 2. CIT V ABINASH GUPTA (2010) 327 ITR 619 (P&H) 5 3. CIT V VARINDERA CONSTRUCTION CO. (2011) 331 ITR 449 (P&H)(FB) 8. SIMILARLY THE HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CA SE OF CIT V. DELHI RACE CLUB LTD. IN ITA NO.128/2008, ORDER D ATED 03.03.2011 BY FOLLOWING THE EARLIER ORDER DATED 02.08.2010 IN ITA NO.179/1991 IN THE CASE OF CIT DELHI-III V. M/S. P.S. JAIN & CO. HELD THAT SUCH CIRCULAR WOULD ALSO BE APPLICABLE TO PENDING CASES. 9. FROM THE RATIO LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE DELHI HI GH COURT, IT IS CLEAR THAT THE INSTRUCTIONS ISSUED IN THE CIRCULARS BY CBDT ARE APPLICABLE FOR PENDING CASES ALSO. THE REFORE, BY KEEPING IN VIEW THE RATIO LAID DOWN IN THE AFORESAI D REFERRED TO CASES, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT INSTRU CTION NO.3/11 DATED 09.02.2011 ISSUED BY THE CBDT ARE APP LICABLE FOR THE PENDING CASES ALSO AND IN THE SAID INSTRUCT IONS, MONETARY TAX LIMIT FOR NOT FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE ITAT IS RS. 3.00 LAKHS. 10. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WITHOUT GOING INTO MERITS OF THE CASE, WE DISMISS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE. 6 11. THE CROSS OBJECTION WAS NOT PRESSED BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. 12. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE AND TH E CROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE STAND DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 20.09.2012. SD/- SD/- (N.K.SAINI) [HARI OM MARATHA] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 20 TH SEPTEMBER, 2012 VL/- COPY TO: THE APPELLANT THE RESPONDENT THE CIT THE CIT(A) THE DR BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, JODHPUR