ITO, Delhi V. Subhash Chand Rastogi, New Delhi

ITA 5350/DEL/1994

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the Income Tax Officer, Ward 14(5), New Delhi against Subhash Chand Rastogi concerning the assessment year 1991-92. The core issue was whether the exported goods, specifically zinc oxide, qualified as 'minerals' and thus were ineligible for deduction under section 80HHC(2)(b)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Delhi High Court had previously directed the Tribunal to decide on this matter. However, during the proceedings, it was determined that the tax effect involved was less than Rs. 50 lakhs, leading to the dismissal of the appeal based on the monetary limit set by the CBDT Circular No.17/2019.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 121965 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 28 year(s) 10 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-08-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 02-08-2023
• Assessment Year: 1991-1992
• Appeal Filed On: 08-09-1994
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Tax effect
• Section: 80HHC

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: B: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.5350/Del/1994 Assessment Year: 1991-92 ITO Ward 14(5), New Delhi vs. Subhash Chand Rastogi, 2195, Bagichi Raghunath, Sadar Bazar, Delhi 110006 (Appellant) (Respondent) For Revenue: Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr. DR For Assessee: None Date of Hearing : 03.08.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 03.08.2023 ORDER PER CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, J.M. First of all, it is pertinent to mentioned that this Departmental appeal has been restored to the Tribunal by Hon’ble High Court of Delhi judgment dated 09.09.2014 in ITA No. 161/2002. In para 12 of said judgment of Hon’ble High Court has directed the Tribunal to decide the issue whether the exported goods were is a ‘mineral’ and therefore, not eligible for deduction in view of section 80HHC(2)(b)(ii) of the Income Tax Act 1961 (for short the ‘Act’). 2. When the case was called for the hearing neither the assessee nor any authorized representative or counsel appeared nor any adjournment application has been filed. On perusal of the copy of the judgment of Hon’ble High Court dated 09.09.2014 (supra) and after consultation with Ld. Senior DR, we are of the view that the matter can be adjudicated on the basis of material available on record without complete construction of appeal file and ex-parte qua assessee. 3. At the very outset, the Ld. Senior DR submitted that the department had filed extant appeal in the year 1994 challenging the order of Ld. CIT(A) wherein the Ld. CIT(A) directed the A.O. to allow deduction u/s. 80HHC of the Act on the alleged export of zinc oxide and allowing deduction of Rs. 45,51,898/- u/s. 80HHC of the Act. The Senior DR, in all fairness, submitted that the tax effect in the sole issue agitated by the revenue in this appeal is less than Rs. 50 lacs. ITA No. 5350/Del/1994 2 4. Therefore, in view of the recent CBDT Circular No.17/2019 dated 8 th August, 2019, raising the monetary limit for filing of the appeal by the Revenue before the Tribunal to Rs.50 lakhs and the subsequent clarification of the CBDT, vide Notification dated 20 th August, 2019 stating that the said Circular is applicable even to pending appeals, the appeal filed by the Revenue is not maintainable. 5. As we have noted above, the ld. Senior DR, fairly conceded that the tax effect involved in the grounds raised by the Revenue being below Rs.50 lakhs, the appeal filed by the Revenue squarely falls within the ambit of the recent CBDT Circular No.17/2019 dated 8 th August, 2019 and the subsequent clarification dated 20 th August, 2019. 6. In view of above, we find the tax effect involved in the grounds raised by the Revenue is admittedly below Rs.50 lakhs. Therefore, in view of the CBDT Circular No.17/2019 dated 8 th August, 2019 raising the monetary limit for filing of the appeals by the Revenue before the Tribunal to Rs.50 lakhs and the subsequent clarification dated 20 th August, 2019 to the effect that the said Circular is applicable even to pending appeals, the appeal filed by the Revenue is not maintainable. Accordingly, the same is dismissed. 7. However, if the Revenue at any point of time finds that the tax effect involved in the grounds of the Revenue is more than Rs.50 lakhs or that the same is falling under the exceptions provided in the said Circular, the Revenue may move necessary application for recall of this order. 8. In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 03.08.2023. Sd/- Sd/- (PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA) (CHANDRA MOHAN GARG) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 03 rd August, 2023. NV/- Copy forwarded to : 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR ITA No. 5350/Del/1994 3 // By Order // Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi