DCIT, New Delhi V. M/s. PFIL Securities Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 6646/DEL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7758 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 5 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-06-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 18-05-2016
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 17-12-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SAURBH GOEL
• Keywords: Tax effect
• Section: 143(3); 147

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH D, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 6646/DEL/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004-05 DCIT, CIRCLE-14(1), VS. M/S PFIL SECURITIES LTD ., ROOM NO. 221, 2 ND FLOOR, 11-A, VANDANA BUILDING CR BLDG., IP ESTATE, 11, TOLSTOY MARG, NEW DELHI NEW DELHI 110 001 (PAN: AAACP3714H) ( APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SH. AMIT JAIN, SR. DR RESPONDENT BY : SH. SAURBH GOEL, CA DATE OF HEARING : 18-5-2016 DATE OF ORDER : 01-06-2016 ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, J.M. THIS APPEAL BY THE DEPARTMENT IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 03.9.2013 OF LD. CIT(A)-XVII, NEW DELHI PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE C ASE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN QUASHING THE ASSESSMENT FRAMED BY THE AO U/S. 143(3) OF THE ACT HOLDING THAT THE RE-ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS U/S. 147 OF THE ACT WERE NOT VALIDLY INITIATED. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE C ASE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN QUASHING THE ASSESSMENT FRAMED BY THE AO U/S. 143(3)/147 OF THE ACT IGNORING THE FACT THAT THE AO COULD HAVE ON LY DISCOVERED THE INDIRECT EXPENSES INCURRED IN EARNING THE INCOME ONLY AFTER DUE DILIGENCE AS THE SAME WAS NOT DIVULGED BY THE ASSESSEE COMPAN Y. 3. THE APPELLANT CRAVES TO BE ALLOWED TO ADD ANY F RESH GROUNDS OF APPEAL AND / OR DELETE OR AMEND ANY OF THE GROUND O F APPEAL. ITA NO.6646/DEL/2013 2 2. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MAT ERIAL ON RECORD. FROM THE ABOVE, WE FIND THAT THE TAX EFFEC T IN THE REVENUES APPEAL IS LESS THAN RS.10,00,000/-, THEREFORE, THE DEPARTMENTS APPEAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE, IN VIEW OF THE CIRCULAR NO. 2 1/2015 DATED 10 TH DECEMBER, 2015 ISSUED VIDE F.NO. 279/MISC. 142/2007 -ITJ (PT.) BY THE CBDT. FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, THE RELEVANT PA RA NOS. 3 & 10 OF THE AFORESAID CBDTS CIRCULAR ARE REPRODUCED AS UNDER:- 3. HENCEFORTH, APPEALS/ SLPS SHALL NOT BE FILED IN CASES WHERE THE TAX EFFECT DOES NOT EXCEED THE MONETARY L IMITS GIVEN HEREUNDER: S NO APPEALS IN INCOME-TAX MATTERS MONETARY LIMIT (IN RS) 1 BEFORE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 10,00,000/- 2 BEFORE HIGH COURT 20,00,000/- 3 BEFORE SUPREME COURT 25,00,000/- IT IS CLARIFIED THAT AN APPEAL SHOULD NOT BE FILED MERELY BECAUSE THE TAX EFFECT IN A CASE EXCEEDS THE MONETA RY LIMITS PRESCRIBED ABOVE. FILING OF APPEAL IN SUCH CASES IS TO BE DECIDED ON MERITS OF THE CASE. 10. THIS INSTRUCTION WILL APPLY RETROSPECTIVELY TO PENDING APPEALS AND APPEALS TO BE FILED HENCEFORTH IN HIGH COURTS/ TRIBUNALS. PENDING APPEALS BELOW THE SPECIFIED TAX LIMITS IN PARA 3 ABOVE MAY BE WITHDRAWN/ NOT PRESSED. APPEALS BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT WILL BE GOVERNED BY THE INSTRUCTI ONS ON THIS SUBJECT, OPERATIVE AT THE TIME WHEN SUCH APPEA L WAS FILED. 3. IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE THAT THE BOARDS INSTRUCTIO N OR DIRECTIONS ISSUED TO THE INCOME-TAX AUTHORITIES ARE BINDING ON THOSE AUTHORI TIES, THEREFORE, THE DEPARTMENT SHOULD HAVE WITHDRAWN/ NOT PRESSED THE P RESENT APPEAL, IN VIEW OF THE AFORESAID INSTRUCTIONS SINCE THE TAX EFFECT IN THE INSTANT APPEAL IS LESS THAN THE AMOUNT OF RS. 10 LACS, PRESCRIBED IN THE ABOVE SAID CBDTS INSTRUCTIONS. ITA NO.6646/DEL/2013 3 4. KEEPING IN VIEW THE CBDT INSTRUCTION NO. 21/2015 DATED 10 TH DECEMBER, 2015, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE REVENUE SHOULD HA VE WITHDRAWN/ NOT PRESSED THE INSTANT APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. WE ARE ALS O OF THE VIEW THAT THE SAID INSTRUCTIONS ARE APPLICABLE FOR THE PENDING APPEALS AND APPEALS TO BE FILED HENCEFORTH IN TRIBUNAL. ACCORDINGLY, THE REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE STAN DS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 01/06/2016. SD/- SD/- (O.P. KANT) (H.S. SIDHU) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIA L MEMBER DATED: 01/06/2016 *SR BHATNAGAR* COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR