ITO, New Delhi V. Smt. Anjana Dhingra, Ghaziabad

ITA 5626/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7343 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-06-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 3
• Next Hearing Date: 14-06-2016
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 17-10-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K K JAISWAL
• Keywords: Gift; Tax effect
• Section: 147; 68

Judgement Text

PAGE 1 OF 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH SMC-3: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 5626/DEL/2014 A.Y. : 2007-08 INCOME TAX OFFICER, VS. SMT. ANJANA DHINGRA, WARD 47(4), NEW DELHI E-192, WINDSOR PARK, 5, VAIBHAV KHAND, INDRAPURAM, GHAZIABAD (PAN: AEFPD0819M) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) DEPARTMENT BY : SH. KK JAISWAL, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : NONE DATE OF HEARING : 14-06-2016 DATE OF ORDER : 14-06-2016 O R D E R PER H.S. SIDHU, JM THIS APPEAL BY THE DEPARTMENT IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 29.8.2014 OF LD. CIT(A)-XXX, NEW DELHI PERTAINING T O ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. 'ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN I) DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS 23,83,502/- (9,25,000 + 14,58,502) MADE U/S 68 OF THE IT ACT, QUASHING THE RE-ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS U/S 147 OF THE IT ACT IGNORING THE JUDGEME NT OF PAGE 2 OF 4 DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF M/S NOVA PROMOTERS & F INLEASE (P) LTD., ITA NO. 342 OF 2011 DATED 15.02.2012, WHE REIN IT IS HELD THAT AT THE STAGE OF ISSUING NOTICE U/S 148, AO IS R EQUIRED TO FORM ONLY A PRIMA FACIE BELIEF OR OPINION THAT IN COME CHARGEABLE TO TAX AT A ESCAPED ASSESSMENT; II) DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 23,83,502/- (9,25,000 + 14,58,502) MADE U/S 68 OF THE IT ACT, WITHOUT PROPER ENQUIRES WHEREAS HE HAS CONTERMINOUS POWER WITH THAT OF THE AO; III) DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 23,85,502/- (9,25,000 + 14,58,502) MADE U/S 68 OF IT ACT WHEREAS THE GENUINENE SS & CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE TRANSACTION IS NOT ESTABLISHED DUR ING THE ASSESSMENT AS WELL AS DURING APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS; IV) DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 9,25,000/- MADE U/S 68 O F THE IT ACT IN THE ABSENCE OF VALID GIFT DEED; V) DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 14,58,502/- MADE U/ S 68 OF THE IT ACT IGNORING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS FAILED TO EX PLAIN THE SOURCE OF INVESTMENT OF RS. 14,58,502/- AS LOAN HAS BEEN GRANTED TO SH. SHISHIR SAXENA, BROTHER OF ASSESSEE'S HUSBA ND WHO IS NOT CO-OWNER. THE ASSESSEE AND HER HUSBAND SH. SHIKHAR SAXENA IS CO-OWNER OF THE PROPERTY; VI) THE APPELLANT CRAVES THE RIGHT TO ALTER, AMEND , ADD OR SUBSTITUTE THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 2. IN THIS CASE, NOTICE OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE WAS SENT BY THE REGISTERED AD POST, IN SPITE OF THE SAME, ASSESSEE, NOR HE R AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE APPEARED TO PROSECUTE THE MATTER IN DI SPUTE, NOR FILED ANY APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT. KEEPING IN VIEW THE FA CTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PRESENT CASE AND THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THE PRESEN T APPEAL, I AM OF THE VIEW THAT NO USEFUL PURPOSE WOULD BE SERVED TO ISSU E NOTICE AGAIN AND PAGE 3 OF 4 AGAIN TO THE ASSESSEE, THEREFORE, I AM DECIDING THE PR ESENT APPEAL EXPARTE QUA ASSESSEE, AFTER HEARING THE LD. DR AND PERUSING THE RECORDS. 3. FROM THE ABOVE, I FIND THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN TH E REVENUES APPEAL IS LESS THAN RS.10,00,000/-, THEREFORE, THE DEPARTMENTS APPEAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE, IN VIEW OF THE CIRCULAR NO. 21/2015 D ATED 10 TH DECEMBER, 2015 ISSUED VIDE F.NO. 279/MISC. 142/2007-ITJ (PT.) BY THE CBDT. FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, THE RELEVANT PARA NOS. 3 & 10 OF T HE AFORESAID CBDTS CIRCULAR ARE REPRODUCED AS UNDER:- 3. HENCEFORTH, APPEALS/ SLPS SHALL NOT BE FILED IN CASES WHERE THE TAX EFFECT DOES NOT EXCEED THE MONETARY LIMITS GIVE N 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 LIMITS PR ESCRIBED ABOVE. FILING OF APPEAL IN SUCH CASES IS TO BE DECIDED 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 INSTRUCTIONS ON THIS SUBJECT, OPERATIVE AT THE TIME WHEN SUCH APPEAL WAS FILED. 4. IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE THAT THE BOARDS INSTRUCTION O R DIRECTIONS ISSUED TO THE INCOME-TAX AUTHORITIES ARE BINDING ON THOSE AUTHOR ITIES, THEREFORE, THE DEPARTMENT SHOULD HAVE WITHDRAWN/ NOT PRESSED THE PRESE NT APPEAL, IN PAGE 4 OF 4 VIEW OF THE AFORESAID INSTRUCTIONS SINCE THE TAX EFFECT IN THE INSTANT APPEAL IS LESS THAN THE AMOUNT OF RS. 10 LACS, PRESCRIBED IN THE A BOVE SAID CBDTS INSTRUCTIONS. 5. KEEPING IN VIEW THE CBDT INSTRUCTION NO. 21/2015 D ATED 10 TH DECEMBER, 2015, I AM OF THE VIEW THAT THE REVENUE SHO ULD HAVE WITHDRAWN/ NOT PRESSED THE INSTANT APPEAL BEFORE THE T RIBUNAL. I AM ALSO OF THE VIEW THAT THE SAID INSTRUCTIONS ARE APPLICABLE FOR THE PENDING APPEALS AND APPEALS TO BE FILED HENCEFORTH IN TRIBUNAL. ACCORD INGLY, THE REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE STAND S DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 14/06/2016. SD/- [H.S. SIDHU] JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE: 14/6/2016 SRBHATNAGAR COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4.CIT (A) 5. DR , ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHES