INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 5(2), AMRITSAR V. SH. HARPREET SINGH SANDHU (HUF), AMRITSAR

ITA 569/ASR/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5747 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-02-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 02-02-2018
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 04-09-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: P N ARORA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR BEFORE SH. SANJAY ARORA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. N.K.CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A NO.569(ASR)/2017 ASSES SMENT YEAR: 2014-15 INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2), AMRITSAR VS. SH. HARPREET SINGH SANDHU (HUF) 41-A, GURU AMAR DASS AVENUE, AJNALA ROAD, AMRITSAR PAN:AAEHH6745P (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) CROSS OBJECTION NO.02(ASR)/2018 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.569(ASR)/2017) ASSESSMEN T YEAR: 2014-15 SH. HARPREET SINGH SANDHU (HUF) 41-A, GURU AMAR DASS AVENUE, AJNALA ROAD, AMRITSAR PAN:AAEHH6745P VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2), AMRITSAR (CROSS OBJECTOR) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SMT. BALWINDER KAUR (DR) RESPONDENT BY: SH. P.N.ARORA (ADV.) DATE OF HEARING: 02.02.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 07.02.20 18 ORDER PER BENCH: THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE REVENUE DIRECTED AGAINST T HE ORDER BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-2, AMRITSAR ( CIT(A) FOR SHORT)) DATED 30.06.2017, ALLOWING THE ASSESSEES APPEAL CONTESTI NG ITS ASSESSMENT U/S. 144/143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (THE ACT H EREINAFTER) FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR (AY) 2014-15 VIDE ORDER DATED 29/12/2016. THE ASSES SEE HAS ALSO FILED A CROSS ITA NO.569 /ASR/2017 & C.O. NO.02/ASR/20 17 HARPREET SINGH SANDHU (HUF) (AY 2014-1 5) 2 OBJECTION (CO), WHICH IS ADMITTED BY THE LD. COUNSE L FOR THE ASSESSEE, SH. P.N. ARORA, ADVOCATE, AS SUPPORTIVE IN NATURE. 2. AT THE VERY OUTSET, IT WAS POINTED OUT BY SH. ARORA THAT THE REVENUES APPEAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE IN VIEW OF SEC.268A OF THE ACT, TAKING US TO THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, WHICH DETERMINES THE ASSESSEES TOTAL TAX LI ABILITY FOR THE YEAR AT RS.9.25 LACS. UPON THIS, THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIV E (DR) WOULD SEEK TIME TO RESPOND, AS THE REVENUES APPEAL WOULD OSTENSIBLY H AVE BEEN FILED UNDER AN EXCEPTING CIRCUMSTANCE, WHICH ARE LISTED AT PARA 8 OF THE CBDT CIRCULAR (NO.21/2015, DATED 10.12.2015/COPY ON RECORD) BEING INVOKED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE REVENUE HAS SUBSEQUENTLY PLACED ON RECORD A LE TTER FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRINCIPLE COMMISSIONER-II, AMRITSAR, AS WELL BY THE JT. CIT, RANGE 5, AMRITSAR, AND THE CONCERNED ASSESSING OFFICER (ITO, WARD-5(2) , AMRITSAR), ALL DATED 01.02.2018, ADDRESSED TO THE LD. DR, STATING THAT T HE REVENUES APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED IN VIEW OF PARA 8(A) OF THE BOARD CIRCULAR DA TED 10.12.2015 SUPRA. THE SAME SAVES APPEALS WHERE THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF A PROV ISION OF THE ACT OR RULE IS UNDER CHALLENGE. ON THAT BASIS, IT IS CLAIMED THAT THE RE VENUE HAS CHALLENGED RULE 46A OF THE INCOME TAX RULES, 1962 (THE RULES HEREINAFTER ) PER THE INSTANT APPEAL, RELYING ON THE DECISION IN THE CASE OF PRABHAVATI S. SHAH VS. CIT [1998] 231 ITR 1 (BOM). 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES, AND PERUSED THE MATER IAL ON RECORD. WE FIND NO BASIS WHATSOEVER IN THE REVENUES RELIAN CE ON PARA 8 OF THE BOARD CIRCULAR 21/2015. THE REVENUE PER ITS INSTANT APPEAL IS ACTUALLY CHALLENGING THE NON OBSERVANCE OF RULE 46A OF THE RULES, MANDAT ORY IN NATURE, BY THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. IT IS THEREFORE IN FACT RELYIN G ON THE VALIDITY OF THE SAID RULE, WHICH IT CLAIMS TO HAVE CONTESTED BEFORE A CONSTITU TIONAL COURT. THE ARGUMENT IS PATENTLY MISCONCEIVED. THE REVENUES APPEAL IS, THE REFORE, NOT MAINTAINABLE IN VIEW OF SEC.268A OF THE ACT, WHICH PROVIDES THAT AN APPEAL AND/OR REFERENCE BY THE ITA NO.569 /ASR/2017 & C.O. NO.02/ASR/20 17 HARPREET SINGH SANDHU (HUF) (AY 2014-1 5) 3 REVENUE BEFORE AN APPELLATE FORUM WOULD BE SUBJECT TO THE MONETARY LIMITS AS PRESCRIBED BY THE BOARD FROM TIME TO TIME, PER CIRC ULARS, INSTRUCTIONS, ETC., AND THAT THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL OR COURT HEARING THE APPEAL (OR REFERENCE) SHALL HAVE REGARD TO THE SAID CIRCULARS, INSTRUCTIONS, ETC. I.E., ISS UED U/S. 268A(1). FURTHER, THE MONETARY LIMIT FOR APPEALS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, AS PER THE SAID CIRCULAR, IS RS.10 LACS. THE REVENUES APPEAL IS FILED AFTER 10.12.201 5, EVEN AS THE CIRCULAR IS ALSO APPLICABLE FOR APPEALS BY THE REVENUE FILED BEFORE THE SAID DATE (REFER PARA 10). THE ASSESSEES CO, AS AFORE-STATED, IS SUPPORTIVE NATURE, SO THAT IT BECOMES INFRUCTUOUS. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED AS NOT MAINTAINABLE, AND THE ASSESSEES CO IS DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON FEBRUARY 07, 2018 SD/- SD/- (N.K.CHOUDHRY) (SANJAY ARORA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED:07/02/2018 /PK/PS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: (1) HARPREET SINGH SANDHU (HUF), AMRITSAR (2) THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2), AMRITSAR (3) THE CIT(APPEALS)-2, AMRITSAR (4) THE CIT CONCERNED (5) THE SR. DR, I.T.A.T. TRUE COPY BY ORDER