ACIT, Jaipur V. GOLDEN BOTTLING LTD., Alwar

ITA 646/JPR/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5107 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-09-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 1997-1998
• Appeal Filed On: 14-07-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R A VERMA
• Keywords: Depreciation; Tax effect

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR JH , - MH - TSU U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH FOE FLAG ;KNO] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI A.D. JAIN, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADA V, AM VK;DJ VIHY LA- @ ITA NO. 646/JP/2015 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z @ ASSESSMENT YEARS : 1997-98 A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR. CUKE VS. M/S GOLDEN BOTTLING LTD., C-780, PHASE-II, RIICO INDUSTRIAL AREA, BHIWADI, DISTRICT- ALWAR (RAJ). LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: AABCG 5207 F VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT JKTLO DH VKSJ LS @ REVENUE BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA (ADDL.CIT) FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ L S@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI MAHENDRA GARGIEYA (ADV.) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF HEARING : 14/09/2016 MN?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 14/09/2016 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: A.D. JAIN, J.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), ALWAR DATED 13/05/2015 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEA R 1997-98, WHEREIN THE REVENUE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), AL WAR HAS ERRED IN LAW AS WELL AS ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN DELETING THE PENALTY U /S ITA 646/JP/2015_ ACIT VS. M/S GOLDEN BOTTLING LTD. 2 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT OF RS. 16,47,852/- IMPOSED BY THE AO WITHOUT APPRECIATING MATERIAL FACTS OF THE CASE. 2. IN THIS CASE, THE LD AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBM ITTED AS UNDER:- IT IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED THAT THE CENTRAL BOAR D OF DIRECT TAXES, VIDE CIRCULAR NO. 21/2015 DATED 16 TH DECEMBER, 2015 HAS REVISED MONETARY LIMITS FOR FILING OF APPEALS BY INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT BEFORE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL TO THE TAX EFFEC T OF RS, 10,00,000/- THAT FOR THIS PURPOSE 'TAX EFFECT VIDE 4 OF THE SAI D CIRCULAR IS AS UNDER: '4. FOR THIS PURPOSE, 'TAX EFFECT' MEANS THE DIFFER ENCE BETWEEN THE TAX ON THE TOTAL INCOME ASSESSED AND THE TAX THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN CHARGEABLE HAD SUCH TOTAL INCOME BEEN REDUCED BY TH E AMOUNT OF INCOME IN RESPECT OF THE ISSUES AGAINST WHICH APPEA L IS INTENDED TO BE FILED (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS 'DISPUTED ISSUES' ]. HOWEVER THE TAX WILL NOT INCLUDE ANY INTEREST THEREON, EXCEPT WHERE CHAN GEABILITY OF INTEREST ITSELF IS IN DISPUTE. IN CASE THE CHANGEABILITY OF INTEREST IS THE ISSUE UNDER DISPUTE, THE AMOUNT OF INTEREST SHALL BE THE TAX EFFECT. IN CASES WHERE RETURNED LOSS IS REDUCED OR ASSESSED A: INCOM E THE TAX EFFECT WOULD INCLUDE NOTIONAL TAX ON DISPUTED ADDITIONS. I N CASE OF PENALTY ORDERS, THE TAX EFFECT WILL MEAN QUANTUM OF PENALTY DELETED OR REDUCED IN THE ORDER TO BE APPEALED AGAINST. ACCORDINGLY, IN CASES WHERE QUANTUM OF PENALTY IS RE DUCED TO AN AMOUNT BELOW RS. 10,00,000/-, THE PENDING APPEALS BY INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT SHALL BE WITHDRAWN/ NOT PRESSED. THAT THE QUANTUM OF PENALTY IN THE RESPONDENT CASE S HALL GET REDUCED BELOW RS.10,00,000/- AFTER THE APPEAL EFFECT IS GIVEN TO ITA 646/JP/2015_ ACIT VS. M/S GOLDEN BOTTLING LTD. 3 THE ORDER DATED 04.07.2016 IN ITA NO. 183/JP/2013 B Y APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR AS UNDER: CONCEALED INCOME AS PER PENALTY ORDER DATED 21.03.2 013 RS. 38,32,216/- LESS :- ADDITIONS U/S 68 DELETED RS. 11,99,162/- DISALLOWANCE OF DEPRECIATION DELETED RS. 3,32, 314/- RS. 15,31,476/- REDUCED INCOME ON WHICH PENALTY IMPOSED RS. 23,0 0,740/- TAX ON FINALLY ASSESSED INCOME RS. 9,89,318/- 40% + SC @ 7.5% (9,20,296+69,022) SINCE THE AO HAS IMPOSED THE IMPUGNED PENALTY U/S 2 71(L)(C) OF THE ACT BEING THE MINIMUM @ 100% HENCE, THE MINIMUM IMPOSABLE PENALTY SHALL ALSO STAND AT THE SAME AMOU NT I.E. RS.9,89, 318/-. KIND ATTENTION IS ALSO DRAWN TOWARDS SEC. 271(LA) OF THE ACT, ACCORDING TO WHICH WHERE, PENALTY HAS AL READY BEEN IMPOSED BEFORE THE RECEIPT OF THE APPELLATE ORDER, THE AMOUNT OF PENALTY ORIGINALLY IMPOSED, SHOULD BE REDUCED, PURS UANT TO THE REDUCTION IN THE ASSESSED INCOME AFTER GIVING EFFEC T TO THE LAST APPELLATE ORDER. ACCORDINGLY, THE AMOUNT OF PENALTY ORIGINALLY IMPOSED SHALL STANDS REDUCED PURSUANT TO THE ITAT OR DER. CONSEQUENTLY, THE DISPUTED AMOUNT OF PENALTY UNDER CHALLENGE HAS STANDS TO AT RS.9,89,318/- ONLY. KINDLY REFER T HE ENCLOSED CHART THE SAME BEING BELOW THE PRESCRIBED LIMIT OF RS . 10,00,000/-, THE APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT IS NOT MA INTAINABLE AND HENCE, KINDLY BE DISMISSED. ITA 646/JP/2015_ ACIT VS. M/S GOLDEN BOTTLING LTD. 4 3. AT THE OUTSET, THE LD SR. DR HAS STRONGLY RELIED ON THE IMPUGNED ORDER. 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE M ATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE RECORD. IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE DEMAND/ TAX EFFECT IN THE REVENUE IN QUESTION IS LESS THAN RS. 10,00,000/-. UNDER THE POWERS VESTED BY SEC. 268A(1) OF THE I T ACT, CBDT HAS RECENTLY ISSUED CIR CULARNO.21 OF 2015 DATED 10.12.2015(F NO. 279/MISC. 142/2007-ITJ( PT) INSTRUCTING THE AUTHORITIES BELOW DEPARTMENTAL APPE AL SHOULD NOT BE FILED BEFORE ITAT WHERE THE DEMAND/TAX EFFEC T DOES NOT EXCEED LESS THAN RS.10 LACS. THE CIRCULAR IS SPECIFI CALLY MENTIONED TO BE APPLICABLE FOR ALL PENDING APPEALS. 5. SUBJECT TO SOME EXCEPTIONS, IT IS FURTHER DIREC TED BY CBDT THAT ALL THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS PENDING BEFORE ITAT WHERE TH E DEMAND/TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN 10 LACS SHOULD BE EITHER WITHDRA WN OR NOT PRESSED BY THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVES. 6. THE PRESENT APPEAL IS NOT COVERED BY ANY EXCEPTIO NS MENTIONED IN THE SAID CBDT CIRCULAR. SINCE THE TAX DEMAND IN DISP UTE IN THIS DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL IS BELOW THE LIMIT SET OUT BY CB DT FOR THE APPEAL THE ITA 646/JP/2015_ ACIT VS. M/S GOLDEN BOTTLING LTD. 5 SAME IS NOT MAINTAINABLE IN VIEW OF FORE GOINGS. ACC ORDINGLY THE APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT IS DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED/WITHDRAWN . 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 14/09/2016. SD/- SD/- FOE FLAG ;KNO , - MH TSU (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) (A.D. JAIN) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 14 TH SEPTEMBER, 2016 * RANJAN VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR. 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- M/S GOLDEN BOTTLING LTD., ALWAR. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 646/JP/2015) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASST. REGISTRAR