ASST., CIT 14(3), MUMBAI V. K. SEVANTILAL & CO, MUMBAI

ITA 6293/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: 629319914 RSA 2010
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-11-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Bench Allotted: H
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 20-08-2010
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: V V SHASTRI
• Assessee Lawyers: GEETAA J GUWALANI
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH H BEFORE SHRI D.K. AGARWAL (JM) & SHRI R.K. PANDA (AM ) I.T.A.NO. 6293/MUM/2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2003-04) ACIT 14(3) 6 TH FLOOR, EARNEST HOUSE NARIMAN POINT MUMBAI-400 021. VS. M/S. K. SEVANTILAL & CO. 74/83, MANGALDAS ROAD DWARKADAS BUILDING NO. 1 2 ND FLOOR, MUMBAI-400 002. PAN/GIR NO. : AAAFK3064C ASSESSEE BY : MISS GEETAA J. GUWALANI DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI V.V. SHASTRI DATE OF HEARING : 15.11.2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : ORDER PER R.K. PANDA, (AM) :- THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE ORDER DATED 2.6.2010 OF LEARNED CIT(A)-25, MUMBAI RELATING TO A .Y. 2003-04. 2. THE REVENUE IN GROUNDS OF APPEAL HAS CHALLENGED THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A) IN DELETING THE PENALTY OF ` 2,36,775/- LEVIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S. 271(1)(C) OF THE I.T. ACT. 3. LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AT THE OUTSET S UBMITTED THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN THE INSTANT CASE IS LESS THAN ` 3 LAKHS. THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF CBDT INSTRUCTION NO. 3 OF 2011 DATED 9.2.2011 REPOR TED IN 332 ITR (STATUTE) 1 AND IN VIEW OF THE DECISION OF HON'BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF MADHUKAR K. INAMDAR HUF, 318 ITR 149 (B OM), APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS NOT MAINTAINABLE AND THEREFORE TH E SAME SHOULD BE DISMISSED. EVEN ON MERIT ALSO THE REVENUES APPEAL HAS TO BE DISMISSED IN VIEW OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR A.Y. 2005- 06, WHERE UNDER IDENTICAL CIRCUMSTANCES PENALTY LEV IED U/S. 271(1)(C) OF THE I.T. ACT WAS DELETED BY LEARNED CIT(A) AND APPE AL FILED BY THE REVENUE WAS DISMISSED BY THE TRIBUNAL. M/S. K. SEVANTILAL & CO. 2 4. LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE WHILE SUPPOR TING THE ORDER OF ASSESSING OFFICER FAIRLY CONCEDED THE SUBMISSION OF LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT UNDER IDENTICAL FACTS AND CIRCUMS TANCES PENALTY DELETED BY LEARNED CIT(A) WAS UPHELD BY THE TRIBUNA L AND APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE HAS BEEN DISMISSED FOR A.Y. 2005-06. 5. AFTER HEARING BOTH SIDES WE FIND THAT THE TAX EF FECT IN THE IMPUGNED APPEAL IS LESS THAN ` 3 LAKHS. THE CBDT VIDE INSTRUCTION NO. 3 OF 2011 DATED 9.2.2011 HAS REVISED THE MONITORY LIM IT FOR FILING THE APPEALS BY THE DEPARTMENT BEFORE THE ITAT, ACCORDIN G TO WHICH THE SAME HAS BEEN RAISED TO ` 3 LAKHS. WE FIND HON'BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF MADHUKAR K. INAMDAR HUF (SUPRA) HAS HELD T HAT CIRCULAR ISSUED BY THE CBDT REVISING THE MONITORY LIMIT WOULD BE AP PLICABLE TO THE PENDING CASES. THEREFORE, TAX EFFECT IN THE IMPUGNE D APPEAL BEING LESS THAN ` 3 LAKHS, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE, IN OUR O PINION, IS NOT MAINTAINABLE. ACCORDINGLY THE SAME IS DISMISSED. EV EN OTHERWISE ALSO IN VIEW OF THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR A.Y. 2005- 06, WHERE UNDER IDENTICAL FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES T HE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A) CANCELING THE PENALTY LEVIED BY THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER HAS BEEN UPHELD AND APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE HAS BEEN DIS MISSED, THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE HAS TO BE DISMISSED. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DI SMISSED. ORDER HAS BEEN PRONOUNCED ON 18 TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2011. SD/- (D.K. AGARWAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER SD/- (R.K. PANDA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 18 TH NOVEMBER, 2011. COPY TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A)-CONCERNED. 4. THE CIT, CONCERNED. M/S. K. SEVANTILAL & CO. 3 5. THE DR CONCERNED, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER TRUE COPY ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI PS