ACIT, New Delhi V. M/s. SVP Industries Ltd., Muzaffarnagar

ITA 5270/DEL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3357 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 7 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-04-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 25-04-2017
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 19-09-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S S RANA
• Keywords: Document seized; Principle of natural justice; Tax effect; Documents seized

Judgement Text

PAGE 1 OF 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH - G, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 5270/DEL/2013 AY: 2001-02 ACIT VS. SVP INDUSTRIES LTD. CENTRAL CIRCLE-19, MANSOORPUR DISTRICT NEW DELHI. MUZAFFARNAGAR PAN AAECS3837C (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI S.S. RANA, C IT(DR) RESPONDENT BY : SHRI BALWANT SINGH, ADVOCATE PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ORDER THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY REVENUE AGAINST ORDER DATED 24.6.2013 OF LD. CIT(A) XXXIII, NEW DELHI. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL A RE AS UNDER: 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN HOLDING THAT VARIOUS DOCUMENTS/BOOKS OF AC COUNT FOUND DURING SEARCH AND SURVEY OPERATION AT THE PREMISES OF UPDA AND SHRI RK. MIGLANI, SECY. GENL.OF UPDA, DO NOT BELONG TO THE MEMBERS OF UPDA. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN IGNORING THE DOCUMENT WHICH CONTAINS THREE YEARS COMPLETE ACCOUNT OF ILLEGAL PAYMENTS MADE BY THE ME MBERS OF UPDA AND WHICH WAS DULY SIGNED BY CORE COMMITTEE MEMBERS/REPRESENTATIVES OF MEMBERS INCLUDING R.K.MI GLANI' CONFIRMING THE VERACITY AND AUTHENTICITY OF THESE P AYMENTS WHICH DOCUMENT WAS DULY DISCUSSED IN ASSESSMENT ORDER AND COPY ATTACHED TO FORM PART OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN NOT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT THE DOCUMEN T WHICH CONTAINED THREE YEARS ACCOUNT OF PAYMENTS AND WAS S IGNED BY ITA NO. 5270/DEL/2013 ACIT VS. SVP INDUSTRIES LTD. PAGE 2 OF 4 CORE COMMITTEE MEMBERS /REPRESENTATIVES OF MEMBERS INCLUDING RK. MIGLANI, ALSO BELONGED TO ALL THE MEMBERS OF UP DA. 4. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN IGNORING THE DOCUMENT WHICH WAS FOUND AT T HE PREMISES OF SARAYA INDUSTRIES LTD. DURING SURVEY OPERATION A ND AMOUNTS PAID TO THEM TO UPDA AS RECORDED IN THE SAID DOCUME NT FAILED WITH THE AMOUNTS FOUND WRITTEN IN THE SEIZED DOCUME NTS WHICH WAS DULY DISCUSSED IN ASSESSMENT ORDER AND COPY ATT ACHED TO FORM PART OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. 5. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN MISCONSTRUING THE MEANING OF THE WORDS' BE LONG AND FOR 'BELONGING TO' AS PROVIDED IN THE INDIAN EVIDENCE A CT. 6. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN NOT CONSIDERING VITAL EVIDENCES VIZ. PRIMA RY, SECONDARY AND CIRCUMSTANTIAL AS DISCUSSED IN THE ASSESSMENT O RDER AND AVAILABLE WITH THE DEPARTMENT INCLUDING FAXES AND, THEREFORE, HAS NOT DENIED NATURAL JUSTICE IN THIS CASE. 7. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN NOT TAKING COGNIZANCE OF THE AMOUNTS OF RS . 30.02 CRORE AND RS. 8.90 CRORE WHICH FIGURED IN THE SAID SEIZED DOCUMENTS IN THE NAMES OF RADICO KHAITAN LTD. AND BALRAMPUR CHIN I MILLS LTD. AND THESE PARTIES SURRENDERED THESE AMOUNTS AND PAI D TAX TO THE EXCHEQUER. 8. THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IS ERRONEOUS AND IS NOT TEN ABLE ON FACTS AND IN LAW 9. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER OR AMEND A NY/ALL OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE OR DURING THE COURSE OF TH E HEARING OF THE APPEAL. 2. WHEN THE APPEAL CAME UP FOR HEARING, THE LD. AUT HORISED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE RESPONDENT ASSESSEE CONTENDED AT THE OUTSET THAT TA X EFFECT IN THIS APPEAL WAS BELOW RS. 10 LAKHS. HE ALSO DREW OUR ATTENTION TO CBDT IN STRUCTION NO. 21/2015 DATED 10 TH DECEMBER, 2015 IN WHICH REVENUE HAS BEEN DIRECTED N OT TO FILE ANY APPEAL IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IF TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN R S. 10,00,000/-. THE LD. AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE CONTENDED THAT THE APPEAL OF THE REV ENUE MAY BE DISMISSED IN THE LIGHT OF CBDT CIRCULAR (SUPRA). THE CIT (DR) APPEARING F OR REVENUE AGREED THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN THIS APPEAL FILED BY REVENUE IS LESS THA N RS. 10 LAKHS. HE ALSO AGREED THAT ITA NO. 5270/DEL/2013 ACIT VS. SVP INDUSTRIES LTD. PAGE 3 OF 4 AFORESAID INSTRUCTION OF CBDT DATED 10.12.2015 WAS APPLICABLE IN THIS APPEAL; AND AGREED THAT THE APPEAL HAS BECOME INFRUCTUOUS IN VI EW OF THIS CBDT INSTRUCTION. 3. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH SIDES AND WE HAVE ALSO PERUSE D THE MATERIALS ON RECORD. FROM THE ABOVE, WE FIND THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN REVE NUES APPEAL IS LESS THAN RS.10,00,000/- . THEREFORE, THIS APPEAL IS COVERED BY INSTRUCTION NO. 21/2015 DATED 10 TH DECEMBER, 2015 OF CBDT, ISSUED VIDE F.NO. 279/MISC. 142/2007-ITJ (PT.) . FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE AF ORESAID CBDT CIRCULAR IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER: .. 3. HENCEFORTH, APPEALS/ SLPS SHALL NOT BE FILED IN CASES WHERE THE TAX EFFECT DOES NOT EXCEED THE MONETARY LIMITS GIVEN HEREUNDER: S NO APPEALS IN INCOME-TAX MATTERS MONETARY LIMIT (IN RS) 1 BEFORE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 10,00,000/- 2 BEFORE HIGH COURT 20,00,000/- 3 BEFORE SUPREME COURT 25,00,000/- IT IS CLARIFIED THAT AN APPEAL SHOULD NOT BE FILED MERELY BECAUSE THE TAX EFFECT IN A CASE EXCEEDS THE MONETARY LIMIT S PRESCRIBED ABOVE. FILING OF APPEAL IN SUCH CASES IS TO BE DECI DED ON MERITS OF THE CASE. .. .. 10. THIS INSTRUCTION WILL APPLY RETROSPECTIVELY TO PENDING APPEALS AND APPEALS TO BE FILED HENCEFORTH IN HIGH COURTS/ TRIBUNALS. PENDING APPEALS BELOW THE SPECIFIED TAX LIMITS IN PARA 3 ABOVE MAY BE WITHDRAWN/ NOT PRESSED. APPEALS BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT WILL BE GOVERNED BY THE INSTRUCTI ONS ON THIS SUBJECT, OPERATIVE AT THE TIME WHEN SUCH APPEAL WAS FILED. ITA NO. 5270/DEL/2013 ACIT VS. SVP INDUSTRIES LTD. PAGE 4 OF 4 4. WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE AFORESAID CBDT INSTR UCTION NO. 21/2015 DATED 10 TH DECEMBER, 2015 IS APPLICABLE FOR THE PENDING APPEAL S FILED BY REVENUE, AS WELL AS FOR THE APPEALS TO BE FILED BY REVENUE HENCEFORTH. IN V IEW OF THE AFORESAID INSTRUCTION, THEREFORE, REVENUE SHOULD HAVE WITHDRAWN / NOT PRE SSED THE PRESENT APPEAL, SINCE THE TAX EFFECT IN THE INSTANT APPEAL IS LESS THAN THE P RESCRIBED LIMIT OF RS. 10,00,000/- , SPECIFIED IN THE AFORESAID CBDT INSTRUCTION NO. 21/ 2015 DATED 10 TH DECEMBER, 2015. 5. IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, WE CONCLUDE THAT THE A PPEAL IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE AFORESAID CBDT INSTRUCTION NO. 21/2015 DATED 10 TH DECEMBER, 2015; AND HOLD THAT THE APPEAL IS, THEREFORE, NOT MAINTAINABLE. ACCORDINGL Y, WE DISMISS THE APPEAL IN LIMINE, APPEAL BEING NOT MAINTAINABLE; WITHOUT GOING INTO T HE MERITS. IN THE RESULT, THIS APPEAL, FILED BY REVENUE; STANDS DISMISSED. BEFORE PARTING, WE WISH TO CLARIFY THAT REVENUE WILL BE FREE TO MOVE ITAT AS PER LAW FOR RECALL OF THIS ORDER IF IT IS FOUND THAT AFORESAID CBDT INSTRUCTION IS NOT APPLICABLE ; AND IF ITAT IS SATI SFIED THEN THIS ORDER MAY BE RECALLED FOR HEARING AND DECISION ON MERITS. THIS DECISION WAS P RONOUNCED ORALLY IN THE OPEN COURT IMMEDIATELY AFTER CONCLUSION OF HEARING. THIS WRITT EN ORDER IS NOW PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 27.4.2017. SD/- SD/- ( H.S. SIDHU ) ( ANADEE NATH MISSHRA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 27.4.2017 *VEENA* COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. PRINCIPAL CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR