ITO, Ward- 1(4), Noida V. Geeta Chauhan, Noida

ITA 65/DEL/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5699 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-06-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 03-01-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B R MISHRA
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH SMC , NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. R.S. SYAL , VICE PRESIDENT ITA NO. 65 /DEL/2015 [ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009 - 10] APPELLANT BY SH. B.R. MISHRA , SR. DR RESPONDENT BY NONE DATE OF HEARING 21 .06.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 22 .06.2018 ORDER PER R.S. SYAL , VICE PRESIDENT THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE HAS BEEN DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) - 1, NO I DA DATED 30.6.2017 FOR AY 2009 - 10. IN THIS CASE, THE AO MADE AN ADDITION OF RS.1 6,48,800/ - U/S 68 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT ACT ). THE LD. CIT(A) ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE BECAUSE NO NOTICE U/S 143(2) OF THE ACT W AS SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE. THE REVENUE IS AGGRIEVED AGAINST THE DELETION OF ADDITION. 2. I HAVE HEARD LD. REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH THE PARTIES. 3. ADMITTEDLY THE TAX EFFECT IN THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL IS LESS THAN RS.10 LAC. THE CBDT CIRCULAR NO.21/2015 DATED 10.12.2015 HA S DIRECTED THAT DEPARTMENT SHALL NOT FILE APPEAL BEFORE TRIBUNAL IN CASES WHERE THE TAX EFFECT DOES NOT EXCE ED MONETARY LIMIT OF RS.10 LAC AND THAT THIS I NSTRUCTION WILL INCOME TAX OFFICE WARD - 1(4), NOIDA A - 2/D, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, SECTOR - 24, NOIDA - 201301 VS SMT. GEETA CHAUHAN W/O SHRI JAGDISH SINGH VILLAGE - SADARPUR, SECTOR - 45, NOIDA (U.P.) PAN - AGKPC4934D (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO.65 /DEL/2018 PAGE | 2 APPLY RETROSPECTIVELY TO PENDING APPEALS AND APPEALS TO BE FILED AS WELL. IT HA S FURTHER BEEN DIRECTED THAT THE APPEALS FILED CONTRARY TO THE I NSTRUCTION MAY BE WITHDRAWN OR NOT PRESSED. IN PARA 8, CERTAIN EXCEPTIONS HAVE BEEN PROVIDED IN WHICH THE DEPARTMENT C AN CONTE S T THE ISSUE O N MERIT S . HOWEVER, NO EXCEPTION IS APPLICABLE TO THE PRESENT CASE. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, I AM OF THE VIEW THAT SINCE THE DEPARTMENT AL APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED AGAINST THE ABOVE I NSTRUCTION OF THE CBDT , THE SAME IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/ - [ R.S. SYAL ] VICE PRESIDENT DATE: - 22 .06.2018 SH COPY FORWARDED TO: 1 . APPLICANT 2 . RESPONDENT 3 . CIT 4 . CIT(APPEALS) CONCERNED 5 . DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI ITA NO.65 /DEL/2018 PAGE | 3 DATE INITIAL DATE OF DICTATION 21.6.2018 PS DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 21.6.2018 PS DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE OTHER MEMBER JM/AM DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. P.S. / P.S. JM/AM DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT PS/PS DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR. P.S. / P.S. PS DATE ON WHICH THE FINAL ORDER IS UPLOADED ON THE WEBSITE OF ITAT PS DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER DATE OF DISPATCH OF THE ORDER *