ACIT, New Delhi V. Smt. Sudha Nagar, New Delhi

ITA 5837/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5271 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 9 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-08-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 30-10-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIJAY VERMA
• Assessee Lawyers: AAKASH CHUGH
• Keywords: Tax effect
• Section: 15

Judgement Text

ITA NO.5 837 /DEL/201 5 ASSESSMENT Y EAR: 2004 - 0 5 PAGE 1 OF 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH D BENCH NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, PRESIDENT & SHRI AMIT SHUKLA , JUDICIAL MEMB E R I N ITA NO. 5837 /DEL/201 4 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 0 4 - 0 5 DCIT CIRCLE 26(2), R. NO. 192, C.R. BUILDING, NEW DELHI VS. VIP FOREX PVT. LTD. 4/35, BASEMENT, HOTEL MAJESTIC PLACE, WEA SARASWATI MARG, KAROL BAGH, NEW DELHI (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) (PAN: A A B C V6909M ) REVENUE BY: SH RI VIJAY VERMA , CIT DR ASSESSEE BY: SHRI AAKASH CHUGH , CA DATE OF HEARING 01 / 0 8 /201 7 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 01 / 0 8 /201 7 ORDER PER AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THE AFORESAID APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 3 . 8 .201 5 , PASSED BY THE LD. CIT (APPEALS) - 3 , NEW DELHI FOR THE QUANTUM OF ASSESSMENT PASSED U/S 1 5 3 ( C ) FOR THE A.Y. 200 4 - 0 5 . IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS: - 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT (A) IS ERRONEOUS AND THE LEARNED CIT (A) HAS ERRED: I ) IN DEL ETING THE ADDITION OF RS 30,00 , 000/ - MADE BY AO ON ACCOUNT OF INCOME FROM UNDI SCLOSED SOURCE PAGE 2 OF 3 II ) IN ACCEPTING UNSUBSTANTIAL EXPLANATION THAT RS.30.00 LA KH S WAS BEING SENT FOR PURCHASE OF PROPERTY LACKING THE DETAILS OF ASSET/PROPERTY OR WHETHER IT WAS ULTIMATELY PURCHASED FOR THE BUSINESS PURPOSE FOR WHICH IT WAS BEING ACQUIRED. III ) IN EXAMINING THE REASONS FOR DIFFERENCE OF EXPLANATION GIVEN BEFORE AO AND CIT (A). 2 . THE APPELLANT CRAVES, LEAVE OR RESERVING THE RIGHT TO AMEND MODIFY ALTER, ADD OR FOREGO ANY GROUNDS OF APPEAL AT ANY TIME BEFORE OR DURING THE HEARING OF THIS APPEAL. 2 . AT THE OUTSET, IT WAS NOTICED THAT THE TAX EFFECT ON THE DISPUTED ISSUE IS LESS THA N RS. 10 LA KH S. THE LD. CIT DR FAIRLY ADMITTED THAT THE TAX EFFECT IS BELOW RS. 10 LA KH S AND THEREFORE, AS PER THE CBDT C IRCULAR NO. 21/2015 DATED 10.12.2015 WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN INSTRUCTED THAT THE REVENUE SHOULD NOT PREFER ANY APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL H AVING TAX E FFECT IS LESS THAN OF RS. 10 LAKH S. 3 . IN VIEW OF T HE AFORESAID FACT THAT THE TAX EFFECT ON THE DISPUTED AMOUNT IN THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS BELOW OF RS. 10 LA KH S , THEREFORE , THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED IN - LIMINE ON THE GROUNDS O F NON - MAINTAINABILITY AS PER THE INSTRUCTION OF CBDT CIRCULAR (SUPRA) . IT HAS BEEN FURTHER CLARIFIED BY THE SAME CIRCULAR THAT THE SAID INSTRUCTIONS FOR NOT FILING OF APPEALS BELOW THE PRESCRIBED MONETARY WILL APPLY ON ALL THE PENDING APPE ALS. 4 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER P RONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 01 . 0 8 .201 7. SD/ - SD/ - ( G.D. AGRAWAL ) (AMIT SHUKLA) (PRESIDENT) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) DATED: 01 . 0 8 .2017 PAGE 3 OF 3 NARENDER COPY FORWARDED TO: 1) APPELLANT 2) RESPONDENT 3) CIT 4) CIT (APPEALS) 5) DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR DATE DRAFT DICTATED ON 01 .0 8 .2017 DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 01 . 0 8 .2017 DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS 1 . 8 .2017 KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON 1 . 8 .2017 FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK 1 . 8 .2017 DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE AR DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER.