DCIT 1(1), Indore V. M/s Alpha Laborities Pvt. Ltd., Indore

ITA 548/Ind/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4012 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-08-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 08-06-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VINEET A D UB E
• Assessee Lawyers: M K SHARMA CA SMT VINEETA DUBE
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

ITA. NO.656/IND/2018 & OTHERS PERSONNEL STAFFING SOLUTION & OTHERS 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRIMANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA. NO.656/IND/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2012-13 ITO 3(3) BHOPAL VS. M/S PERSONNEL STAFFING SOLUTION PVT. LTD. 91, MAHABALI NAGAR, KOLAR ROAD, TAN NO. AADCP3617J (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) C.O.NO.25/IND/2019 (ARISING OUT OF ITA. NO.656/IND/2018) ASSESSMENT YEAR:2012-13 M/S PERSONNEL STAFFING SOLUTION PVT. LTD. 91, MAHABALI NAGAR, KOLAR ROAD, TAN NO. AADCP3617J VS. ITO 3(3) BHOPAL (APP ELLANT ) (RESPONDENT) ITA. NOS.547 TO 549/IND/2018 ASSESSMENT YEARS:2009-10, 2010-11 & 2014-15 DCIT(1)-1, INDORE VS. M/S ALPA LABORATORIES LTD. 33/2, A.B. ROAD, NEAR RAU GRAM, PIGDAMBER, INDORE PAN:AACCA8437C (APP ELLANT ) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SMT. VINEETA DUBE, SR. D.R. RESPONDENT BY SHRI M.K. SHARMA, CA APPELLANT BY SMT. VINEETA DUBE, SR. D.R. RESPONDENT BY SHRI SUDHIR PADALIYA CA ITA. NO.656/IND/2018 & OTHERS PERSONNEL STAFFING SOLUTION & OTHERS 2 ITA. NO.477/IND/2015 ASSESSMENT YEARS:2010-11 D CIT( 1 ) - 1 , INDORE VS. SHRI VAJIND ER SINGH CHHABRA 1, NEAR ASHARAM KA ASHRAM, GRAM LIMBODI, KHANDWA ROAD, INDORE PAN NO.ACJPC6685J (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA. NO.531/IND/2015 ASSESSMENT YEARS:2010-11 SHRI VAJINDER SINGH CHHABRA 1, NEAR ASHARAM KA ASHRAM, GRAM LIMBODI, KHANDWA ROAD, INDORE PAN NO.ACJPC6685J VS. DCIT- 5(1), INDORE (APP ELLANT ) (RESPONDENT) IT(SS)A. NO.18/IND/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2012-13 ACIT (CENTRAL) - 2 , INDORE VS. SHRI SHEKHAR BHANDARI 30/1, DR. R.S. BHANDARI MARG, INDORE PAN NO.ACIPB0870F (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO.33/IND/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2013-14 ACIT (CENTRAL)-2, INDORE VS. SHRI SHEKHAR BHANDARI 30/1, DR. R.S. BHANDARI MARG, INDORE APPELLANT BY SMT. ASHIMA GUPTA CIT- DR RESPONDENT BY SHRI ANIL KAMAL GARG & ARPIT GA UR, CAS ITA. NO.656/IND/2018 & OTHERS PERSONNEL STAFFING SOLUTION & OTHERS 3 PAN NO.ACIPB0870F (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) C.O. NO. 02/IND/2018 (ARISING OUT OF ITA. NO.33/IND/2017) ASSESSMENT YEAR:2013-14 ACIT (CENTRAL) - 2, INDORE VS. SHRI SHEKHAR BHANDARI 30/1, DR. R.S. BHANDARI MARG, INDORE PAN NO.ACIPB0870F (APP ELLANT ) (RESPONDENT) [ O R D E R PER BENCH; THE ABOVE CAPTIONED BUNCH OF APPEALS AT THE INSTANCE OF THE REVENUE, CROSS OBJECTIONS & APPEALS OF THE ASSE SSEES ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE DIFFERENT ORDERS OF THE LD. CO MMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL), INDORE & BHOPAL AND THE APPEAL S WERE TAKEN UP TOGETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY THE COMMON ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE AND BREVITY. 2. AT THE OUTSET, LD. COUNSELS FOR THE ASSESSEES PO INTED OUT THAT THESE APPEALS ARE NOT MAINTAINABLE IN VIEW OF THE CBDTS APPELLANT BY SMT. ASHIMA GUPTA CIT - DR RESPONDENT BY MRS. SHREYA JAIN, CA DATE OF HEARING 21 .08.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 2 1 .08.2019 ITA. NO.656/IND/2018 & OTHERS PERSONNEL STAFFING SOLUTION & OTHERS 4 CIRCULAR NO.3/2018 AND SUBSEQUENT AMENDMENT THERETO DATED 8 TH AUGUST, 2019. IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT UNDER TH E IDENTICAL FACTS, THE COORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBU NAL VIDE ORDER DATED 14.8.2019 IN ITA NO.1398/AHD/2004 AND OTHERS AND IN THE CASE OF ITO VS. DINESH MADHAVLAL PATEL HAS DISM ISSED THE REVENUES APPEALS REJECTING THE OBJECTIONS OF THE R EVENUE. 3. LD. D.R. APPEALING ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE COUL D NOT CONTROVERT THIS FACT. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND GON E THROUGH THE RECORDS. IT IS NOTED THAT IN ALL THESE APPEALS, THE TAX EFFECT IS BELOW MONETARY LIMITS OF RS.50 LAKHS AS PRESCRIBED UNDER THE CBDT CIRCULAR NO.3/2018 DATED 8 TH AUGUST, 2019 (SUPRA). THE COORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO.1398/AHD/2004 AND OTHERS IN THE CASE OF ITO VS. DINESH MADHAVLAL PATEL (SUPRA) DECIDED THE ISSUE BY HOLDIN G AS UNDER: 1. THESE 628 APPEALS AND COS PERTAIN TO THE APPEAL S ARE FILED BY VARIOUS ASSESSING OFFICERS, ALL THESE APPEALS CALL INTO QUESTION CORRECTNESS OF THE RELIEF GRANTED TO THE TAXPAYERS BY THE COMMISSIONERS OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AND, MOST IMP ORTANTLY, THE TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN ALL THESE APPEALS DOES NOT E XCEED RS 50,00,000 IN EACH OF THESE APPEALS. THE CROSS OBJECTIONS TAKE N UP FOR HEARING ARE ONLY SUCH CROSS OBJECTIONS AS EMANATE FROM THES E APPEALS AND ARE BROADLY IN SUPPORT OF THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS). IN THESE CASES, IN THE LIGHT OF THE DISC USSIONS WITH THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (GUJARAT ) AND REPRESENTATIVES OF THE AHMEDABAD ITAT BAR ASSOCIATI ON, INDIVIDUAL ITA. NO.656/IND/2018 & OTHERS PERSONNEL STAFFING SOLUTION & OTHERS 5 NOTICES ARE DISPENSED WITH; NOTICES OF HEARING ARE GIVEN ONLY THROUGH THE NOTICE BOARD. 2. IT IS IN THIS BACKDROP THAT WE ARE PLEASED TO TA KE NOTE OF A VERY PRAGMATIC AND TAXPAYER FRIENDLY POLICY DECISION BY THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA FOR REDUCING THE INCOME TAX LITIGATION. VI DE CBDT CIRCULAR DATED 8TH AUGUST, 2019, THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT H AS FURTHER LIBERALIZED ITS POLICY FOR NOT FILING APPEALS AGAIN ST THE DECISIONS OF THE APPELLATE AUTHORITIES IN FAVOUR OF THE TAXPAYERS, W HEREIN TAX INVOLVED IS BELOW CERTAIN THRESHOLD LIMITS, AND ANN OUNCED ITS POLICY DECISION NOT TO FILE, OR PRESS, THE APPEALS, BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL, AGAINST THE APPELLATE ORDERS FAVOURABLE TO THE ASSE SSEE IN THE CASES IN WHICH OVERALL TAX EFFECT, EXCLUDING INTEREST EXC EPT WHEN INTEREST ITSELF IS IN DISPUTE, IS RS 50,00,000 OR LESS. WHAT IT MEANS, IN PLAIN WORDS, IS THAT WHEN A COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) GIVES THE TAXPAYER TAX RELIEF OF UPTO RS 50 LAKHS IN AN APPEAL IN AN ASSES SMENT YEAR, THE MATTER ENDS THERE AND THE RELIEF SO GRANTED BY THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) CANNOT BE CHALLENGED BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL , THAT WHEN THIS TRIBUNAL GIVES THE TAXPAYER RELIEF OF UPTO RS 1 CRO RE IN AN APPEAL IN AN ASSESSMENT YEAR, THE MATTER ENDS THERE AND THE R ELIEF SO GRANTED BY THE TRIBUNAL CANNOT BE CHALLENGED BEFORE THE HON BLE HIGH COURT, AND THAT WHEN HONBLE HIGH COURT GIVES RELIEF OF UP TO RS 2 CRORE TO THE TAXPAYER IN AN APPEAL IN AN ASSESSMENT YEAR, TH AT RELIEF CANNOT BE CHALLENGED BEFORE HONBLE SUPREME COURT. THESE M ONETARY THRESHOLD LIMITS FOR FILING OF APPEALS BY THE INCOM E TAX AUTHORITIES DO NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT INTEREST AND OTHER COROLLARIE S OF THE TAX DEMANDS BEING CONFIRMED SUCH AS PENALTIES, EXCEPT W HEN A PENALTY ITSELF IS SUBJECT MATTER OF LITIGATION, AND PROSECU TIONS. THE ENHANCEMENT OF THESE MONETARY LIMITS IS AT AN UNPRE CEDENTED SCALE. THE MONETARY LIMIT FOR APPEALS BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL , WHICH WAS RS 3,00,000 TILL 10TH JULY 2014, HAS BEEN IN EFFECT ENHANCED TO ALMOST 1,700% IN THE LAST FIVE YEARS. THIS SUBSTANT IAL RELAXATION IS CERTAINLY A HUGE STEP WHICH SIGNIFIES TRUST REPOSED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA IN THE DECISIONS OF THE APPELLA TE FORUMS, AND SUBSTANTIALLY CUTS DOWN TIME TAKEN IN THE FINALITY OF THE APPELLATE PROCESS. IT IS INDEED HEARTENING TO NOTE THAT IN ON E STROKE, THE GOVERNMENT HAS NOT ONLY PREVENTED, BUT HAS, IN EFFE CT, SET THE STAGE FOR WITHDRAWAL OF THOUSANDS OF APPEALS BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL AND BEFORE HONBLE COURTS ABOVE. IN AN ENV IRONMENT IN WHICH RETROSPECTIVELY WAS ATTACHED ONLY TO THE TAXA TION AND NOT TO TAX RELIEFS OR CONCESSIONS, SUCH AN APPROACH IS A P LEASANT DEPARTURE FROM LEGACY PRACTICES. 3. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACTUAL BACKGROUND AND THE GENEROUS CONCESSION BY THIS BENEVOLENT CBDT CIRCULAR, ALL TH ESE APPEALS MUST BE DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN AND THE RELATED CROSS OBJ ECTIONS MUST BE ITA. NO.656/IND/2018 & OTHERS PERSONNEL STAFFING SOLUTION & OTHERS 6 DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS. THERE IS, HOWEVER, A SMAL L ISSUE THAT WE MUST DEAL WITH. 4. SMT APARNA AGARWAL, LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESE NTATIVE, HOWEVER, HAS A POINT TO MAKE. SHE POINTS OUT THAT T HE CIRCULAR DATED 8TH AUGUST 2019 IS NOT CLEARLY RETROSPECTIVE INASMU CH AS IT SPECIFICALLY STATES IN PARA 4 THAT (T)HE SAID MODIFICATIONS SHALL COME INTO EFFECT FROM THE DATE OF ISSUE OF THIS CIR CULAR . IT IS THUS POINTED OUT THAT THIS SENTENCE GIVES AN IMPRES SION THAT IS ONLY AFTER THE DATE OF THE SAID CIRCULAR THAT THE DEPART MENTAL APPEALS WILL NOT BE FILED IN THE CASES WITHIN THE SPECIFIED TAX EFFECT LIMITS. WE ARE URGED TO BEAR IN MIND THE IMPACT OF THIS OBSERVATIO N WHILE GIVING EFFECT TO THE CIRCULAR DATED 8TH AUGUST, 2019. SHE, HOWEVER, HASTENS TO ADD THAT SHE IS YET TO HAVE ANY SPECIFIC INSTRUC TIONS ON THE ISSUE AND SHE LEAVES IT FOR THE BENCH TO TAKE THE APPROPR IATE CALL. LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES APPEARING FOR THE TAXPAYERS VEHEMEN TLY OPPOSE THE SUGGESTION IMPLICIT IN HER SUBMISSIONS. ALL OF THEM ARE UNANIMOUS IN THEIR ARGUMENT THAT THE CIRCULAR MUST BE HELD TO HA VE RETROSPECTIVE APPLICATION AND MUST EQUALLY APPLY TO THE PENDING A PPEALS AS WELL. SHRI J P SHAH, SENIOR ADVOCATE, POINTS OUT THAT THE CIRCULAR DATED 8TH AUGUST 2019 IS NOT A STANDALONE CIRCULAR AND IT IS REQUIRED TO BE READ WITH THE OLD CIRCULAR NO. 3 OF 2018 WHICH IS WHAT I T SEEKS TO MODIFY. THIS CIRCULAR, ACCORDING TO THE LEARNED COUNSEL, ON LY ENHANCES THE MONETARY LIMITS AND GIVES FURTHER RELAXATION. HE UR GES US NOT TO READ THE CIRCULAR IN A MANNER SO AS TO NULLIFY THE UNDER LYING APPROACH AND OBJECT OF REDUCING LITIGATION. SHRI SOPARKAR, LEARN ED SENIOR ADVOCATE, SUBMITS THAT ALL THAT THE PRESENT CIRCULAR DOES IS TO MODIFY THE MONETARY LIMITS AND NOTHING MORE, AND, THEREFORE, I T CANNOT BE TREATED TO FOLLOW ANY OTHER APPROACH OTHER THAN THE APPROACH FOLLOWED IN THE OLD CIRCULAR. THE OLD CIRCULAR, BEY OND ANY DISPUTE OR CONTROVERSY, CATEGORICALLY APPLIED TO THE PENDING A PPEALS AS ON THE DATE OF ISSUANCE OF CIRCULAR. SHRI TUSHAR HEMANI, L EARNED SENIOR ADVOCATE, POINTS OUT THAT THE CIRCULAR DATED 8TH AU GUST 2019 ONLY GIVES FURTHER RELIEF NOT ONLY IN TERMS OF THE MONET ARY LIMITS BUT ALSO IN TERMS OF THE MANNER IN WHICH THE APPLICATION OF CIR CULAR TO ORDERS DEALING WITH MORE THAN ONE YEAR IS TO MADE. SHRI S N DIVETIA, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, SUBMITS THAT UNLIKE IN TH E CASES OF EARLIER CBDT CIRCULARS, WHICH USED TO BE IN SUPERSESSION OF EARLIER CIRCULARS ON THE ISSUES, THE CIRCULAR DATED 8TH AUGUST 2019 O NLY MODIFIES THE EARLIER CIRCULAR WHICH, INTER ALIA, PROVIDED FOR IT S RETROSPECTIVE APPLICATION. OUR ATTENTION IS INVITED TO SOME JUDIC IAL PRECEDENTS IN SUPPORT OF THE CONTENTION THAT THE BENEVOLENT CIRCU LAR, SUCH AS THE ONE IN QUESTION, IS TO BE GIVEN EFFECT IN RESPECT OF TH E PENDING APPEALS AS WELL. MS URVASHI SHODHAN, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE A SSESSEE, POINTS OUTS THAT ITS PLAINLY CONTRARY TO THE SCHEME OF THE LITIGATION POLICY OF THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA TO GIVE THIS CIRCULAR ONLY PROSPECTIVE EFFECT. SHRI S K SADHWANI, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE , INVITES OUR ATTENTION TO THE LETTER DATED 16TH JULY 2018 ISSUED BY MEMBER CBDT ITA. NO.656/IND/2018 & OTHERS PERSONNEL STAFFING SOLUTION & OTHERS 7 TO THE ALL THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONERS OF INC OME TAX, IN THE CONTEXT OF CIRCULAR DATED 11 TH JULY 2018 THAT THE PRESENT CIRCULAR SEEKS TO MODIFY, SEEKING REPORT ON WITHDRAWAL OF TH E APPEALS COVERED BY THE CIRCULAR. HE THEN POINTS OUT THAT IT IS THE OLD CIRCULAR IS STILL ALIVE TODAY AND THE ONLY CHANGE IS WITH RESPECT TO THE MONETARY LIMITS. IN ALL FAIRNESS, THEREFORE, THE SAME APPROA CH REGARDING WITHDRAWAL OF PENDING APPEALS MUST BE FOLLOWED FOR THIS CIRCULAR AS WELL. ON THE SAME LINES, ARGUMENTS ARE ADVANCED BY THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES WHICH, FOR THE SAKE OF BREVITY AND TO AVOID REPETITION, WE ARE NOT REFERRING TO IN MORE SPECIFIC DETAILS. I N BRIEF REJOINDER, LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE GRACIOUSLY LEAV ES THE MATTER TO US. 5. HAVING CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND HAVI NG PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD, WE DO NOT HAVE SLIGHTEST OF HES ITATION IN HOLDING THAT THE CONCESSION EXTENDED BY THE CBDT NOT ONLY A PPLIES TO THE APPEALS TO BE FILED IN FUTURE BUT IT IS ALSO EQUALL Y APPLICABLE TO THE APPEALS PENDING FOR DISPOSAL AS ON NOW. OUR LINE OF REASONING IS THIS. THE CIRCULAR DATED 8TH AUGUST 2019 IS NOT A STANDAL ONE CIRCULAR. IT IS TO BE READ IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE CBDT CIRCULAR NO 3 OF 2018 (AND SUBSEQUENT AMENDMENT THERETO), AND ALL IT DOES IS T O REPLACE PARAGRAPH NOS. 3 AND 5 OF THE SAID CIRCULAR. THIS IS EVIDENT FROM THE FOLLOWING EXTRACTS FROM THE CIRCULAR DATED 8 TH AUGUST 2019: 2. AS A STEP TOWARDS FURTHER MANAGEMENT OF LITIGATI ON. IT HAS BEEN DECIDED BY THE BOARD THAT MONETARY LIMITS FOR FILING OF APPEALS IN INCOME-TAX CASES BE ENHANCED FURTHER THR OUGH AMENDMENT IN PARA 3 OF THE CIRCULAR MENTIONED ABOVE AND ACCORDINGLY. THE TABLE FOR MONETARY LIMITS SPECIFIE D IN PARA 3 OF THE CIRCULAR SHALL READ AS FOLLOWS: S.NO. APPEALS/SLPS IN INCOME-TAX MATTERS MONETARY L IMIT (RS.) 1 BEFORE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 50,00,000 2 BEFORE HIGH COURT 1,00,00,000 3 BEFORE SUPREME COURT 2,00,00,000 3. FURTHER, WITH A VIEW TO PROVIDE PARITY IN FILING OF APPEALS IN SCENARIOS WHERE SEPARATE ORDER IS PASSED BY HIGHER APPELLATE AUTHORITIES FOR EACH ASSESSMENT YEAR VIS-A-VIS WHER E COMPOSITE ORDER FOR MORE THAN ONE ASSESSMENT YEARS IS PASSED. PARA 5 OF THE CIRCULAR IS SUBSTITUTED BY THE FOLLOWING PARA: 5. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL CALCULATE THE TAX EFFECT SEPARATELY FOR EVERY ASSESSMENT YEAR IN RESPECT OF THE DISPUTED ISSUES IN THE CASE OF EVERY ASSESSEE. IF IN THE CASE OF AN ASSESSEE, THE DISPUTED ISSUES ARISE IN MORE THAN ONE ASSESSMENT YEAR, APPEAL CAN BE FILED IN RESPECT OF SUCH ASSESSMENT YEAR OR YEARS IN WHICH THE TAX EFFECT IN RESPECT OF THE DISPUTED ISSUES EXCEEDS THE ITA. NO.656/IND/2018 & OTHERS PERSONNEL STAFFING SOLUTION & OTHERS 8 MONETARY LIMIT SPECIFIED IN PARA 3. NOAPPEAL SHALL BE FILED IN RESPECT OF AN ASSESSMENT YEAR OR YEARS IN WHICH THE TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN THE MONETARY LIMIT SPECIFIED IN PARA 3. FURTHER, EVEN IN THE CAS E OF COMPOSITE ORDER OF ANY HIGH COURT OR APPELLATE AUTHORITY WHICH INVOLVES MORE THAN ONE ASSESSMENT YEAR AND COMMON ISSUES IN MORE THAN ONE ASSESSMENT YEAR NO APPEAL SHALL BE FILED IN RESPECT OF AN ASSESSMENT YEAR OR YEARS IN WHICH THE TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN THE MONETARY LIMIT SPECIFIED IN PARA 3. IN CASE WHERE A COMPOSITE ORDER/ JUDGEMENT INVOLVES MORE THAN ONE ASSESSEE, EACH ASSESSEE SHALL BE DEALT WITH SEPARATELY 4. THE SAID MODIFICATIONS SHALL COME INTO EFFECT FR OM THE DATE OF ISSUE OF THIS CIRCULAR. 6. CLEARLY, ALL OTHER PORTIONS OF THE CIRCULAR NO. 3 OF 2018 (SUPRA) HAVE REMAINED INTACT. THE PORTION WHICH HAS REMAINED INT ACT INCLUDES PARAGRAPH 13 OF THE AFORESAID CIRCULAR WHICH IS AS FOLLOWS: 13. THIS CIRCULAR WILL APPLY TO SLPS/ APPEALS/ CROS S OBJECTIONS/ REFERENCES TO BE FILED HENCEFORTH IN SC/HCS/TRIBUNAL AND IT SHALL ALSO APPLY RETROSPECTI VELY TO PENDING SLPS/ APPEALS/ CROSS OBJECTIONS/REFERENC ES. PENDING APPEALS BELOW THE SPECIFIED TAX LIMITS IN P ARE 3 ABOVE MAY BE WITHDRAWN/ NOT PRESSED. 7. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSIONS, WE HEREBY HOLD THAT THE RELAXATION IN MONETARY LIMITS FOR DEPARTMENTAL APPE ALS, VIDE CBDT CIRCULAR DATED 8TH AUGUST 2019 (SUPRA) SHALL BE APP LICABLE TO THE PENDING APPEALS IN ADDITION TO THE APPEALS TO BE FI LED HENCEFORTH. 8. LEARNED COMMISSIONER (DR) THEN SUBMITS LIBERTY M AY KINDLY BE GIVEN TO POINT OUT, UPON NECESSARY FURTHER VERIFICA TIONS, AND TO SEEK RECALL THE DISMISSAL OF APPEALS AND RESTORATION OF THE APPEALS IN THE CASES (I) IN WHICH IT CAN BE DEMONSTRATED THAT THE APPEALS ARE COVERED BY THE EXCEPTIONS, AND (II) WHICH ARE INADV ERTENTLY INCLUDED IN THIS BUNCH OF APPEALS, WHEREIN THE TAX EFFECT, I N TERMS OF THE CBDT CIRCULAR (SUPRA), EXCEEDS RS 50,00,000. NONE OPPOSE S THIS PRAYER; WE ACCEPT THE SAME. WE MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THE APPELLAN TS SHALL BE AT LIBERTY TO POINT OUT THE CASES WHICH ARE WRONGLY IN CLUDED IN THE APPEALS SO SUMMARILY DISMISSED, EITHER OWING TO WRO NG COMPUTATION OF TAX EFFECT OR OWNING TO SUCH CASES BEING COVERED BY THE PERMISSIBLE EXCEPTIONS- OR FOR ANY OTHER REASON, AND WE WILL TA KE APPROPRIATE REMEDIAL STEPS IN THIS REGARD. 9. IN THE LIGHT OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSIONS, ALL THE A PPEALS STAND DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN. AS THE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE ARE FOUND TO BE NON-MAINTAINABLE AND AS ALL THE RELATED CROSS-OBJECTIONS ITA. NO.656/IND/2018 & OTHERS PERSONNEL STAFFING SOLUTION & OTHERS 9 OF THE ASSESSEE ARISE ONLY AS A RESULT OF THOSE APP EALS AND MERELY SUPPORT THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A), THE CROSS OBJECTIO NS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALSO DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS. ORDERED , ACCORDINGLY. 10. AS WE PART WITH THE MATTER, WE MUST PLACE ON RE CORD OUR DEEP APPRECIATION TO OUR OWN TEAM WHICH HAS PAINSTAKINGL Y IDENTIFIED ALL THESE LOW TAX EFFECT APPEALS IN THE LONG WEEKEND AN D LESS THAN TWO WORKING DAYS, TO THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER O F INCOME TAX GUJARAT, AS ALSO THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENT ATIVES, FOR HIS IMMENSE HELP, COOPERATION AND ACTIVE INVOLVEMENT IN SPEEDILY DISPOSING OF THESE APPEALS, AND, OF COURSE, TO THE ITAT BAR ASSOCIATION AHMEDABAD FOR THEIR WHOLE HEARTED COOPE RATION IN THIS SPECIAL DRIVE. THE CIRCULAR WAS ISSUED ON THURSDAY THE 8TH AUGUST 2019, AND WITHIN TWO WORKING DAYS AND THE LONG WEEK END, TODAY ON 14TH AUGUST 2019, ALL THE APPEALS STAND DISPOSED OF . ITS ONLY A TEAM EFFORT AND WHOLE HEARTED COOPERATION OF ALL THE STA KEHOLDERS THAT CAN ENABLE US TO SO SPEEDILY IMPLEMENT TAXPAYER FRIENDL Y INITIATIVES OF THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA.THE TAXPAYER RELIEF INVOLVED IN THESE APPEALS, INCLUDING INTEREST AND THE OTHER COROLLARIES, IS ES TIMATED TO BE WELL OVER RS 350 CRORES. THE LEAD CASE BEFORE US IS AN A PPEAL FILED OVER FIFTEEN YEARS AGO BY THE INCOME TAX OFFICER AND IT DEALS WITH AN ASSESSMENT YEAR WHICH PERTAINS TO THE PERIOD OVER T WENTY YEARS AGO. YET, THE MATTER HAD NOT REACHED THE FINALITY AND TH E REVENUES CHALLENGE TO THE RELIEF GRANTED BY THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) HAD REMAINED UNDECIDED. THAT IS NOTHING BUT PROLONGED A GONY OF UNCERTAINTY TO THE TAXPAYERS. IT IS INDEED AN APPRE CIABLE GOODWILL GESTURE BY THE GOVERNMENT, FOR SO MANY TAXPAYERS, O N THE EVE OF THIS INDEPENDENCE DAY AND OFFERING THEM FREEDOM FROM THE PROLONGED MENTAL AGONY AND UNCERTAINTY OF LITIGATION. 11. IN THE RESULTS, ALL THE APPEALS ARE DISMISSED A S WITHDRAWN AND THE CROSS OBJECTIONS ARE DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT TODAY ON THE 14TH AUGUST, 2019. 6. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE COOR DINATE BENCH, WE HEREBY DISMISS THE ABOVE APPEALS OF THE R EVENUE IN LIMINE WITHOUT GOING TO THE MERITS OF THE CASE. 7. SO FAR AS CROSS OBJECTIONS & APPEALS FILED BY TH E RESPECTIVE ASSESSEES ARE CONCERNED THE SAME WERE NOT PRESSED B Y THE LD. COUNSELS IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS ARE ITA. NO.656/IND/2018 & OTHERS PERSONNEL STAFFING SOLUTION & OTHERS 10 NOT MAINTAINABLE BEING LOW TAX EFFECT. ACCORDINGLY, CROSS OBJECTIONS & APPEALS ARE DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED. 8. IN THE RESULT, DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS FILED BY TH E REVENUE AND CROSS OBJECTIONS & APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSS EES ARE DISMISSED. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21/08/201 9 SD/- SD/- (MANISH BORAD) (KUL BHARAT) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 21/08/2019 *PATEL COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. D.R., ASSTT. REGISTRAR