Appeal details
Counselvise Citation
72222714 RSA 2014
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
1 year(s) 1 month(s) 7 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date
21-12-2015
Appeal Filed By
Department
Order Result
Dismissed
Bench Allotted
DB
Assessment Year
2004-2005
Appeal Filed On
13-11-2014
Judgement Text
1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.C. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 422/IND/2014 A.Y. - 2007-08 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 (1) , BHOPAL . APPELLANT VS. M/S BHOPAL MOTORS P. LTD. BHOPAL PAN- AAACB 5811 B . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : S/SHRI ANIL KHABYA AND SUMIT KHAB YA, CAS ITA NO. 192/IND/2014 A.Y. - 2008-09 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 3 (1) , BHOPAL . APPELLAN T VS. SHRI RAJEEV SHUKLA, RAISEN, BHOPAL PAN- ACIPS 9736 K . RESPONDENT 2 DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : NONE ITA NO. 781/IND/2014 A.Y. - 2009-10 INCOME TAX OFFICER, JHABUA . APPELLANT VS. SHRI PUSPENDRA SINGH TOMAR, JHABUA PAN- AEAPT 5483 N . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : NONE ITA NO. 740/IND/2014 A.Y. - 2006-07 INCOME TAX OFFICER, 5 (3) , INDORE . APPELLAN T VS. SHRI RAJKUMAR SHAMBHUDAYAL AGRAWAL, INDORE PAN- ADCPA 0468 M . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI J.P.SARAF, CA 3 ITA NO. 694/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2011-12 INCOME TAX OFFICER-1 RATLAM . APPELLANT VS. SHRI BIHARILAL TANK, RATLAM PAN- AEKPT 3781 R . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : NONE ITA NO. 695/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2012-13 INCOME TAX OFFICER 2 (1), UJJAIN . APPELL ANT VS. M/S SHREE BALAJI COLD STORAGE, GRAM-UNDASA, UJJAIN PAN- ABSFS 5100 Q . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S.S.DESHPANDE, CA 4 ITA NO. 355/IND/2014 A.Y. - 2008-09 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5 (1), INDORE . APPELLA NT VS. SMT INDIRA PATODI, INDORE PAN- AJIPP 0345 A . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI PRAKASH JAIN, CA IT(SS)A NO. 53/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2004-05 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 (1), BHOPAL . APPELL ANT VS. SHRI RATAN LALCHANDANI, BHOPAL PAN- ABBPL 7599 R . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S.S.DESHPANDE, CA 5 ITA NO. 514/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2009-10 INCOME TAX OFFICER, 2 (1), UJJAIN . APPEL LANT VS. SHRI ROOP CHAND PRAJAPATI, UJJAIN PAN- AKGPP 4402 P . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI SANJAY AGRAWAL, CA ITA NO. 452/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2009-10 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 (1), INDORE . APPELLA NT VS. SHRI MANISH KALANI, INDORE PAN- ACBPK 8196N . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI AVINASH GAUR, ADV. 6 ITA NO. 282/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2011-12 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 (1), BHOPAL . APPELLA NT VS. SHRI RAKESH GUPTA, BHOPAL PAN- AAXPG 9477 C . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : S/SHRI ANIL KHABYA AND SUMIT KHAB YA, CAS ITA NO. 418/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2008-09 INCOME TAX OFFICER 5 (3), INDORE . APPELLA NT VS. SHRI RAMESHWAR BADRILAL CHOUHAN VILLAGE KANADIA DISTT- INDORE PAN- ATNPC 4239 K . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S.S.SOLANKI, CA 7 ITA NO. 73/IND/2015 ITA NO. 91/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2007-08 ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5 (1), BHOPAL DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5 (1), BHOPAL . APPELLAN T VS. M/S SHIV SOLVENT EXTRACTION PRODUCTS PVT. LTD., BHOPAL PAN- AAECS 0089 G . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : S/SHRI ANIL KHABYA AND SUMIT KHAB YA, CAS ITA NO. 127/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2010-11 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 3 (1) , INDORE . APPELLANT VS. SHRI NITESH MUNJE, INDORE PAN- ADTPN 0657 Q . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI J.P.SARAF, CA 8 ITA NO. 464/IND/2013 A.Y. - 2007-08 INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 (1) , INDORE . APPELLANT VS. M/S KRISHNAKRIPA HOLDINGS PVT.LTD. INDORE PAN- AAACK 7152 N . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI K.C.AGRAWAL,CA ITA NO. 330/IND/2014 A.Y. - 2006-07 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 (1) , BHOPAL . APPELLAN T VS. SHRI SANJEEV SAXENA, BHOPAL PAN- AMQPS 4860 G . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI PRAKASH JAIN,CA 9 ITA NO. 708/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2010-11 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 (1) , UJJAIN . APPELLAN T VS. M/S CENTRAL INDIA ACADEMY, DEWAS PAN- AAAAC 4091Q . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S.S.DESHPANDE, CA ITA NO. 631/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2006-07 INCOME TAX OFFICER-1 RATLAM . APPELLA NT VS. SHRI YOGESH GOYAL, INDORE PAN- AHAPG 1538 L . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : NONE 10 ITA NO. 409/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2010-11 INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION) BHOPAL . APPELLANT VS. GOOD NEWS SERVICE SOCIETY, BHOPAL PAN- AAATG 2023 K . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : NONE ITA NO. 242/IND/2014 A.Y. - 2002-03 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 (2) , BHOPAL . APPELLAN T VS. SHRI RAMESH CHAND AGRAWAL (HUF), BHOPAL PAN- AADHR 3453 H . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S.S.DESHPANDE, CA 11 ITA NO. 57/IND/2014 A.Y. - 2007-08 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5 (1) , INDORE . APPELLAN T VS. SHRI SURESH KUMAR JAIN, INDORE PAN- ABGPJ 2799 E . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S.S.SHEETAL, ADV. ITA NO. 543/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2011-12 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 3 (1) , INDORE . APPELLAN T VS. MASHAL HOTEL PVT. LTD., INDORE PAN- AAFCM 7187 G . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI PRAKASH JAIN, CA 12 ITA NO. 567/IND/2013 A.Y. - 2005-06 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 (2) , INDORE . APPELLAN T VS. SANCHAY FINCOM LTD. , INDORE PAN- AAACD 6056 C . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : NONE ITA NO. 699/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2006-07 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX RATLAM . APPELLANT VS. SMT. INDIRA DEVI GANEDIWAL, MANDSAUR PAN- AEHPG 1089 L . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : NONE 13 ITA NO. 640/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2011-12 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 (1) , UJJAIN . APPELLAN T VS. M/S SHRINIWAS BOARD & PAPERS PVT. LTD., UJJAIN PAN- AACCS 7555 D . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S.S.DESHPANDE, CA ITA NO. 786/IND/2014 A.Y. - 2009-10 INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2 (2) , UJJAIN . APPE LLANT VS. M/S GOLDEN CHEMICAL TRANSPORT COMP., NAGDA PAN- AADFG 7071 J . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : S/SHRI NITIN GARUD AND ASHOK BHANU PRIYA, CAS 14 ITA NO. 630/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2012-13 INCOME TAX OFFICER-2 RATLAM . APPELLANT VS. SHRI OM PRAKASH NAGAR PROP. M/S OM MARKETING JAORA DISTT. RATLAM PAN- ABSPN 4521 G . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : NONE ITA NO. 600/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2008-09 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 (1) , BHOPAL . APPELLAN T VS. M/S JHARNESHWAR NAGRIK SAHAKARI BANK MYDT., BHOPAL PAN- AAATJ 0506 C . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : NONE 15 ITA NO. 633/IND/2014 A.Y. - 2010-11 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX RATLAM . APPELLANT VS. BHARAT KUMAR VERMA PROP. M/S VERMA TANKER TRANSPORT NEEMUCH PAN- AAKPV 9886 H . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : S/SHRI S.N.AGRAWAL AND PANKAJ MOGR A, CAS ITA NO. 638/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2010-11 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 (1) , UJJAIN . APPELLAN T VS. SHRI AMIT KUMAR JINDAL, UJJAIN PAN- AFCPJ 4325 C . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : NONE 16 ITA NO. 321/IND/2014 A.Y. - 2009-10 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 (1) , INDORE . APPELLAN T VS. M/S JAJOO SURGICAL PVT.LTD., INDORE PAN- AAACJ 7196 B . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI K.C.AGRAWAL, CA ITA NO. 449/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2009-10 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 4 (1) , INDORE . APPELLAN T VS. M/S PREMIER INDUSTRIES LTD., INDORE PAN- AABCP 1890 P . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : S/SHRI S.N.AGRAWAL AND PANKAJ MOGR A, CAS 17 ITA NO. 716/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2010-11 INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), UJJAIN . APPELLANT VS. M/S ALJAMIA SAADAT UL ULOOM MEGHNAGAR DISTT- JHABUA PAN- AACTA 7288 G . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL , CA ITA NO. 453/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2009-10 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 (1), INDORE . APPELLA NT VS. SHRI SAURABH KALANI, INDORE PAN- AADPK 3439 N . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI AVINASH GAUR, ADV. 18 ITA NO. 319/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2007-08 INCOME TAX OFFICER 4(3), INDORE . APPELLANT VS. M/S VAIBHAV COTTON P. LTD., INDORE PAN- AACCV3182F . RESPONDENT CROSS OBJECTION NO. 37/IND/2015 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 319/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2007-08 M/S VAIBHAV COTTON P. LTD., INDORE , PAN- AACCV3182F . OBJECTOR VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER 4(3), INDORE . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : S/SHRI S.N. AGRAWAL AND PANKAJ MOG RA, CAS 19 ITA NO. 328/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2009-10 INCOME TAX OFFICER-2 KHANDWA . APPELLANT VS. SHRI POONAM SHUKLA KHANDWA PAN- CLTPS9251B . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI VIJAY BANSAL, CA ITA NO. 451/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2006-07 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1(1) INDORE . APPELLANT VS. SMT. NAMITA KALANI INDORE PAN- ABMPK6861C . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI AVINASH GAUR, ADV. 20 ITA NO. 721/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2004-05 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1(1) INDORE . APPELLANT VS. SHRI GURVINDER SINGH BHATIA INDORE PAN- ABHPB5245N . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : NONE ITA NO. 327/IND/2013 A.Y. - 2005-06 ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1(1) BHOPAL . APPELLANT VS. MOHD. SHAKEEL KHAN BHOPAL PAN- AMUPK7601F . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S.S. DESHPANDE, CA 21 ITA NO. 718/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2011-12 INCOME TAX OFFICER, MANDSAUR . APPELLANT VS. SHRI SANDEEP SONI, MANDSAUR PAN- ASZPS0430C . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : NONE ITA NO. 706/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2011-12 ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1) INDORE . APPELLANT VS. M/S. RAJRATAN GLOBAL WIRE LTD., INDORE PAN- AABCR4530Q . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI P.D. NAGAR, CA 22 ITA NO. 285/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2011-12 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1(1) BHOPAL . APPELLANT VS. M/S. LILASONS INDUSTRIES LTD., BHOPAL PAN- AAACL5311N . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : S/SHRI ASHISH GOYAL AND N.D. PATWA ITA NO. 215/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2007-08 ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 3(1) BHOPAL . APPELLANT VS. M/S. NARMADA TRANSMISSION PVT. LTD., BHOPAL PAN- AABCN0638B . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S.S. DESHPANDE, CA 23 IT(SS)A NOS. 51-52/IND/2015 AND ITA NO. 283/IND/2015 A.Y. 2009-10, 2010-11 AND 2011-12 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1(1) BHOPAL . APPELLANT VS. M/S. ARK TRANSFORMERS PVT. LTD., BHOPAL PAN- AABCA2562R . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : S/SHRI ANIL KHABYA AND SUMIT KHABYA, CAS ITA NO. 529/IND/2014 A.Y. - 2006-07 ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 3(1) BHOPAL . APPELLANT VS. M/S. SRISHTI INFOTEK PRIVATE LIMITED, BHOPAL PAN- AAJCS6479H . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : NONE 24 IT(SS)A NO. 259/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2008-09 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5(1) BHOPAL . APPELLANT VS. M/S. ABHISHEK ENTERPRISES, BHOPAL PAN- AARFA0751F . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : NONE ITA NO. 697/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2010-11 ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1(1) UJJAIN . APPELLANT VS. SHRI HIMMAT SINGH THAKUR PROP. M/S HIMMAT SINGH ANTAR SINGH VILLAGE-SIYA,DEWAS PAN- AAMPT0504A . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : NONE 25 ITA NO. 611/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2010-11 ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1) INDORE . APPELLANT VS. M/S. RAJRATAN GLOBAL WIRE LTD., INDORE PAN- AABCR4530Q . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI P.D. NAGAR, CA ITA NO. 440/IND/2014 A.Y. - 2006-07 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, 2(1) INDORE . APPELLANT VS. SHRI NITESH KUMAR DOSHI INDORE PAN- ABJPD2801Q . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI MANOJ GUPTA & PANK AJ SHAH, CAS 26 ITA NO. 355/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2010-11 INCOME TAX OFFICER-5(1) INDORE . APPELLANT VS. M/S. SHREE PARSHWA MARKETING LTD., INDORE PAN- AAHCS 7636 Q . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI P.D. NAGAR, CA ITA NO. 19/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2008-09 DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5(1) BHOPAL . APPELLANT VS. M/S. S.S. CROP CARE LTD., BHOPAL PAN- AACCS1450P . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : S/SHRI ASHISH GOYAL AND N.D. PATWA 27 ITA NO. 27/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2006-07 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX1(1), UJJAIN . APPELLANT VS. SHRI MUKESH RANKA, UJJAIN PAN- ABMPR7841P . RESPONDENT CROSS OBJECTION NO. 26/IND/2015 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 27/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2006-07 SHRI MUKESH RANKA, UJJAIN PAN- ABMPR7841P . OBJECTOR VS. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX1(1), UJJAIN . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : S.S. DESHPANDE, CA 28 ITA NO. 711/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2011-12 INCOME TAX OFFICER-1(1) UJJAIN . APPELLANT VS. SMT. MANAK JINWALA UJJAIN PAN- ACEPJ1823G . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, CA IT(SS)A NOS. 13 TO 16/IND/2014 A.YS. - 2006-07 TO 2009-10 DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(1) BHOPAL . APPELLANT VS. SHRI HARISH PATEL BHOPAL PAN- AFXPP1595F . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : NONE 29 ITA NO. 649/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2008-09 ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2(1) BHOPAL . APPELLANT VS. M/S. NATHURAM SHRINARAYAN AGRAWAL ITARSI PAN- AACFN6525F . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : S/SHRI ANIL KHABYA AND SUMIT KHABYA, CAS ITA NO. 354/IND/2014 A.Y. - 2008-09 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4(1) INDORE . APPELLANT VS. SMT. ARPITA SOGANI, INDORE PAN- ANJPS2998D . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI PRAKASH JAIN, CA 30 ITA NO. 705/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2010-11 ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5(1) INDORE . APPELLANT VS. M/S. SIMRAN FARMS LTD., INDORE PAN- AACCS4135P . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : NONE ITA NO. 714/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2012-13 INCOME TAX OFFICER SHAJAPUR . APPELLANT VS. M/S. SHUJALPUR MARKETING & PROCESSING SOCIETY, SHAJAPUR PAN- AABFT0042L . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : NONE 31 ITA NO. 78/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2011-12 DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(1) BHOPAL . APPELLANT VS. SHRI ANIL GUPTA, BHOPAL PAN- AAWPG4767E . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : NONE ITA NO. 600/IND/2014 A.Y. - 2009-10 ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(1) INDORE . APPELLANT VS. SHRI GIRISH KUMAR SHARDA INDORE PAN- BPAPS1072Q . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI PRAKASH JAIN, CA 32 ITA NO. 494/IND/2013 A.Y. - 2010-11 ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(2) BHOPAL . APPELLANT VS. SHRI SUDHIR CHOPRA, NEW DELHI PAN- AADPC6596Q . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : NONE ITA NO. 610/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2010-11 ACIT-2(1) INDORE . APPELLANT VS. SHRI ANIL BANDI, INDORE PAN- ACFPB4784K . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI P.D. NAGAR, CA 33 ITA NO. 593/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2011-12 INCOME TAX OFFICER MANDSUAR . APPELLANT VS. SHRI GOPAL SONI MANDSAUR PAN- COSPS3027B . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : NONE ITA NO. 182/IND/2014 A.Y. - 2010-11 DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2(1) INDORE . APPELLANT VS. M/S. COLUMBIA EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY INDORE PAN- AAAAC0938J . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : NONE 34 ITA NO. 452/IND/2013 A.Y. - 2008-09 ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2(1) INDORE . APPELLANT VS. SHRI GOPAL SOMANI INDORE PAN- AKRPS4219F . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI PRAKASH JAIN, CA ITA NOS. 220 & 221/IND/2014 A.Y. - 2003-04 & 2004-05 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(1) BHOPAL . APPELLANT VS. M/S. VARDHMAN CONSTRUCTION BHOPAL PAN-AADFB0052C . RESPONDENT 35 CROSS OBJECTION NO. 12 & 13/IND/2014 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NOS. 220 & 221/IND/2014 A.Y. - 2003-04 & 2004-05 M/S. VARDHMAN CONSTRUCTION BHOPAL PAN-AADFB0052C ..... OBJECTOR VS. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(1) BHOPAL . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : WRITTEN SUBMISSION ITA NO. 332/IND/2008 A.Y. - 2004-05 ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(2) BHOPAL . APPELLANT VS. SHRI ASEEM SINGH BHOPAL PAN- AMYPS2295P . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI PRAKASH JAIN,CA 36 ITA NO. 722/IND/2014 A.Y. - 2004-05 ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2(1) UJJAIN . APPELLANT VS. SH. AJAY BHARGAVA UJJAIN PAN- ACIPB3700G . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : S.S. DESHPANDE, CA ITA NO. 639/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2011-12 ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2(1) UJJAIN . APPELLANT VS. SHRI AMIT KUMAR JINDAL, UJJAIN PAN- AFCPJ4325C . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : NONE 37 ITA NO. 592/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2011-12 ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3(1) BHOPAL . APPELLANT VS. M/S. PARAS HOUSING PVT. LTD., BHOPAL PAN- AAACP6144K . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : S/SHIR ASHISH GOYAL AND N.D. PATWA ITA NO. 570/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2005-06 ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1) INDORE . APPELLANT VS. M/S. PREMIER INDUSTRIES (I) LTD., INDORE PAN- AABCP1890P . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : S/SHRI S.N. AGRAWAL & P ANKAJ MOGRA 38 ITA NO. 148/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2008-09 INCOME TAX OFFICER, SHAJAPUR . APPELLANT VS. SHRI MAHENDRA KUMAR JAIN SHUJALPUR MANDI, DISTT. SHAJAPUR PAN- ABUPJ8852B . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : NONE ITA NO. 717/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2010-11 INCOME TAX OFFICER MANDSAUR . APPELLANT VS. M/S. SURYA FOOD PRODUCTS, MANDSAUR PAN- AABFF0950B . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : NONE 39 ITA NO. 591/IND/2015 A.Y. - 2008-09 ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2(1) BHOPAL . APPELLANT VS. M.P. STATE AGRO INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT CORP.LTD. BHOPAL PAN- AACCM 0330 Q . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI AJAY K. CHHAJED, A DV. DATE OF HEARING : 21.12.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21.12.2015 ORDER PER BENCH THESE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE EMANATE FROM THE ORDERS OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (APPEALS), 2. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES. WE FIND THAT RECEN TLY THE CBDT VIDE CIRCULAR NO. 21/20145 ISSUED ON 10.12.201 5 HAS REVISED THE MONETARY LIMIT FOR FILING OF APPEAL BEF ORE ITAT FIXING 40 THE TAX EFFECT LIMIT AT RS.10 LACS. THE SAID CIRCU LAR IS REPRODUCED HEREUNDER FOR READY REFERENCE :- CIRCULAR NO. 21/2015 F NO 279/MISC. 142/2007-ITJ (PT) CENTRAL BOARD DIRECT TAXES NEW DELHI THE 10 TH DECEMBER, 2015 SUBJECT : REVISION OF MONETARY LIMITS FOR FIL ING OF APPEALS BY THE DEPARTMENT BEFORE INCOME TAX APPEL LATE TRIBUNAL AND HIGH COURTS AND SLP BEFORE SUPREME COU RT MEASURES FOR REDUCING LITIGATION REG. REFERENCE IS INVITED TO BOARDS INSTRUCTION NO 5/2014 DATED 10.07.2014 WHEREIN MONETARY LIMITS AND OTHER CONDITIONS FOR FILING DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS (IN INCO ME-TAX MATTERS) BEFORE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AND HIGH COURTS AND SLP BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT WERE SPECIFIED. 2. IN SUPERSESSION OF THE ABOVE INSTRUCTION, IT HAS BEEN DECIDED BY THE BOARD THAT DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS MAY BE FILED ON MERITS BEFORE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AND HIGH COURTS AND SLP BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT KEEPING IN VIEW TH E MONETARY LIMITS AND CONDITIONS SPECIFIED BELOW. 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/- 41 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 C ASES IS TO BE DECIDED ON MERITS OF THE CASE. 4. FOR THIS PURPOSE, TAX EFFECT MEANS THE DIFFERE NCE BETWEEN THE TAX ON THE TOTAL INCOME ASSESSED AND TH E TAX THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN CHARGEABLE HAD SUCH TOTAL INCO ME BEEN REDUCED BY THE AMOUNT OF INCOME IN RESPECT OF THE ISSUES AGAINST WHICH APPEAL IS INTENDED TO BE FILED (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS DISPUTED ISSUES). HOW EVER THE TAX WILL NOT INCLUDE ANY INTEREST THEREON, EXCEPT W HERE CHARGEABILITY OF INTEREST ITSELF IS IN DISPUTE. IN CASE THE CHARGEABILITY OF INTEREST IS THE ISSUE UNDER DISPUT E, THE AMOUNT OF INTEREST SHALL BE THE TAX EFFECT. IN CASE S WHERE RETURNED LOSS IS REDUCED OR ASSESSED AS INCOME, THE TAX EFFECT WOULD INCLUDE NOTIONAL TAX ON DISPUTED ADDIT IONS. IN CASE OF PENALTY ORDERS, THE TAX EFFECT WILL MEAN QUANTUM OF PENALTY DELETED OR REDUCED IN THE ORDER TO BE APPEALED AGAINST. 5. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL CALCULATE THE TAX EF FECT SEPARATELY FOR EVERY ASSESSMENT YEAR IN RESPECT OF THE DISPUTED ISSUES IN THE CASE OF EVERY ASSESSEE. IF, IN THE CASE OF AN ASSESSEE, THE DISPUTED ISSUES ARISE IN M ORE THAN ONE ASSESSMENT YEAR, APPEAL, CAN BE FILED IN R ESPECT OF SUCH ASSESSMENT YEAR OR YEARS IN WHICH THE TAX E FFECT IN RESPECT OF THE DISPUTED ISSUES EXCEEDS THE MONET ARY LIMIT SPECIFIED IN PARA 3. NO APPEAL SHALL BE FILED IN RESPECT OF AN ASSESSMENT YEAR OR YEARS IN WHICH THE TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN THE MONETARY LIMIT SPECIFIED IN PARA 3. IN OTHER WORDS, HENCEFORTH, APPEALS CAN BE FILED ON LY WITH REFERENCE TO THE TAX EFFECT IN THE RELEVANT ASSESSM ENT YEAR. HOWEVER, IN CASE OF A COMPOSITE ORDER OF ANY HIGH COURT OR APPELLATE AUTHORITY, WHICH INVOLVES MORE T HAN ONE ASSESSMENT YEAR AND COMMON ISSUES IN MORE THAN ONE ASSESSMENT YEAR, APPEAL SHALL BE FILED IN RESPE CT OF ALL SUCH ASSESSMENT YEARS EVEN IF THE TAX EFFECT IS L ESS THAN THE PRESCRIBED MONETARY LIMITS IN ANY OF THE YEAR(S ), IF IT IS 42 DECIDED TO FILE APPEAL IN RESPECT OF THE YEAR(S) IN WHICH TAX EFFECT EXCEEDS THE MONETARY LIMIT PRESCRIBED. IN CASE WHERE A COMPOSITE ORDER/ JUDGEMENT INVOLVES MORE TH AN ONE ASSESSEE, EACH ASSESSEE SHALL BE DEALT WITH SEPARATELY. 6. IN A CASE WHERE APPEAL BEFORE A TRIBUNAL OR A CO URT IS NOT FILED ONLY ON ACCOUNT OF THE TAX EFFECT BEING L ESS THAN THE MONETARY LIMIT SPECIFIED ABOVE, THE COMMISSIONE R OF INCOME-TAX SHALL SPECIFICALLY RECORD THAT EVEN THO UGH THE DECISION IS NOT ACCEPTABLE, APPEAL IS NOT BEING FIL ED ONLY ON THE CONSIDERATION THAT THE TAX EFFECT IS LESS TH AN THE MONETARY LIMIT SPECIFIED IN THIS INSTRUCTION. FURT HER, IN SUCH CASES, THERE WILL BE NO PRESUMPTION THAT THE INCOME-TAX DEPARTMENT HAS ACQUIESCED IN THE DECISIO N ON THE DISPUTED ISSUES. THE INCOME-TAX DEPARTMENT SHAL L NOT BE PRECLUDED FROM FILING AN APPEAL AGAINST THE DISPUTED ISSUES IN THE CASE OF THE SAME ASSESSEE FO R ANY OTHER ASSESSMENT YEAR, OR IN THE CASE OF ANY OTHER ASSESSEE FOR THE SAME OR ANY OTHER ASSESSMENT YEAR, IF THE TAX EFFECT EXCEEDS THE SPECIFIED MONETARY LIMIT S. 7. IN THE PAST, A NUMBER OF INSTANCES HAVE COME TO THE NOTICE OF THE BOARD, WHEREBY AN ASSESSEE HAS CLAIME D RELIEF FROM THE TRIBUNAL OR THE COURT ONLY ON THE G ROUND THAT THE DEPARTMENT HAS IMPLICITLY ACCEPTED THE DEC ISION OF THE TRIBUNAL OR COURT IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSE E FOR ANY OTHER ASSESSMENT YEAR OR IN THE CASE OF ANY OTH ER ASSESSEE FOR THE SAME OR ANY OTHER ASSESSMENT YEAR, BY NOT FILING AN APPEAL ON THE SAME DISPUTED ISSUES. T HE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVES/COUNSELS MUST MAKE EVE RY EFFORT TO BRING TO THE NOTICE OF THE TRIBUNAL OR TH E COURT THAT THE APPEAL IN SUCH CASES WAS NOT FILED OR NOT ADMITTED ONLY FOR THE REASON OF THE TAX EFFECT BEIN G LESS THAN THE SPECIFIED MONETARY LIMIT AND, THEREFORE, N O INFERENCE SHOULD BE DRAWN THAT THE DECISIONS RENDER ED THEREIN WERE ACCEPTABLE TO THE DEPARTMENT. ACCORDIN GLY, THEY SHOULD IMPRESS UPON THE TRIBUNAL OR THE COURT THAT SUCH CASES DO NOT HAVE ANY PRECEDENT VALUE. AS THE EVIDENCE OF NOT FILING APPEAL DUE TO THIS INSTRUCTI ON MAY HAVE TO BE PRODUCED IN COURTS, THE JUDICIAL FOLDERS IN THE 43 OFFICE OF CSIT MUST BE MAINTAINED IN A SYSTEMIC MAN NER FOR EASY RETRIEVAL. 8. ADVERSE JUDGMENTS RELATING TO THE FOLLOWING ISSU ES SHOULD BE CONTESTED ON MERITS NOTWITHSTANDING THAT THE TAX EFFECT ENTAILED IS LESS THAN THE MONETARY LIMIT S SPECIFIED IN PARA 3 ABOVE OR THERE IS NO TAX EFFECT : (A) WHERE THE CONSTITUTIONAL VALIDITY OF THE PROV ISIONS OF AN ACT OR RULE ARE UNDER CHALLENGE, OR (B) WHERE BOARDS ORDER, NOTIFICATION, INSTRUCTIO N OR CIRCULAR HAS BEEN HELD TO BE ILLEGAL OR ULTRA VIRE S, OR (C) WHERE REVENUE AUDIT OBJECTION IN THE CASE HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT, OR (D) WHERE THE ADDITION RELATES TO UNDISCLOSED FOR EIGN ASSETS/ BANK ACCOUNTS. 9. THE MONETARY LIMITS SPECIFIED IN PARA 3 ABOVE SH ALL NOT APPLY TO WRIT MATTERS AND DIRECT TAX MATTERS OTHER THAN INCOME TAX. FILING OF APPEALS IN OTHER DIRECT TAX M ATTERS SHALL CONTINUE TO BE GOVERNED BY RELEVANT PROVISION S OF STATUTE & RULES. FURTHER, FILING OF APPEAL IN CASES OF INCOME TAX, WHERE THE TAX EFFECT IS NOT QUANTIFIABL E OR NOT INVOLVED, SUCH AS THE CASE OF REGISTRATION OF TRUST S OR INSTITUTIONS UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE IT ACT, 1961, SHALL NOT BE GOVERNED BY THE LIMITS SPECIFIED IN PARA 3 A BOVE AND DECISION TO FILE APPEAL IN SUCH CASES MAY BE TAKEN ON MERITS OF A PARTICULAR CASE. 10. THIS INSTRUCTION WILL APPLY RETROSPECTIVELY TO PENDING APPEALS AND APPEALS TO BE FILED HENCEFORTH IN HIGH COURTS/ TRIBUNALS. PENDING APPEALS BELOW THE SPECIF IED TAX LIMITS IN PARA 3 ABOVE MAY BE WITHDRAWN/NOT PRESSED. APPEALS BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT WILL BE GOVERNED BY THE INSTRUCTIONS ON THIS SUBJECT, OPERA TIVE AT THE TIME WHEN SUCH APPEAL WAS FILED. 11. THIS ISSUES UNDER SECTION 268A (1) OF THE INCOM E-TAX ACT 1961. 44 3. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE CIRCULAR, SINCE THE TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IS BELOW THE PRESCRIBED MONETARY LIMIT FOR FILING OF APPEALS BEFORE THE ITAT, THEREFORE, THE PRESENT APP EAL DESERVES TO BE DISMISSED IN LIMINE BEING NOT MAINTAINABLE IN VIEW OF ABOVE CIRCULAR NO. 21/20145 DATED 10.12.2015. 4. WE FURTHER FIND THAT HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS M/S. P. S. JAIN & CO. IN ITA NO.179/1991 DA TED 02.08.2010 HAS HELD AS UNDER: THIS COURT CAN VERY WELL TAKE JUDICIAL NOTICE OF T HE FACT THAT BY PASSAGE OF TIME MONEY VALUE HAS GONE DOWN, THE C OST OF LITIGATION EXPENSES HAS GONE UP, THE ASSESSEES ON T HE FILE OF THE DEPARTMENTS HAVE BEEN INCREASED CONSEQUENTLY, T HE BURDEN ON THE DEPARTMENT HAS ALSO INCREASED TO A TREMENDOUS EXTENT. THE CORRIDORS OF THE SUPERIOR C OURTS ARE CHOCKED WITH HUGE PENDENCY OF CASES. IN THIS VIEW OF THE MATTER, THE BOARD HAS RIGHTLY TAKEN A DECISION NOT TO FILE REFERENCES IF THE TAX EFFECT LESS THAN RS. 2 LAKHS. THE SAME POLICY FOR OLD MATTERS NEEDS TO BE ADOPTED BY THE D EPARTMENT. IN OUR VIEW, THE BOARDS CIRCULAR DATED MARCH 27, 2 000 IS VERY MUCH APPLICABLE EVEN TO THE OLD REFERENCES WHI CH ARE STILL UNDECIDED. THE DEPARTMENT IS NOT JUSTIFIED I N PROCEEDING WITH THE OLD REFERENCES WHEREIN THE TAX IMPACT IS M INIMAL. THUS, THERE IS NO JUSTIFICATION TO PROCEEDS WITH DE CADES OLD REFERENCES HAVING NEGLIGIBLE TAX EFFECT. SIMILARLY, HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN THE CASE O F CIT V. SURESHCHANDRA DURGAPRASAD KHATOD (HUF) (2012) 253 C TR 492 45 (GUJ) HAS SPECIFICALLY CONSIDERED INSTRUCTION NO. 3 /2011 AND HELD THAT THE SAME WOULD APPLY TO PENDING CASES AS WELL EVEN THOUGH THERE WAS A SPECIFIC CONDITION IN THAT INSTRUCTION ALSO THAT THE SAME WOULD APPLY TO APPEALS FILED ON OR AFTER FEBRU ARY, 2011. HONBLE HIGH COURT HAS CONSIDERED THIS ISSUE AS UND ER:- 6. THE QUESTION ABOUT APPLICABILITY OF INSTRUCTION NO.3 OF 2011 HAD BEEN CONSIDERED AND DECIDED BY THE AURANGABAD B ENCH OF THE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN TAX APPEAL NO. 78 OF 2007, THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX V. SMT. VIJAYA V. KAVEKA R DECIDED ON 29.7.2011. THE DIVISION BENCH, AFTER CONSIDERING EARLIER INSTRUCTIONS AND VARIOUS DECISIONS OF THE COURTS ON INSTRUCTIONS, RELYING ON THE DECISION IN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME T AX VS. MADHUKAR K. INAMDAR (HUF) REPORTED IN (2010) 229 CT R (BOM) 77, HAS HELD IN PARAGRAPHS 9, 10, 11, 14 AND 17 AS UNDER: '9. AS STATED EARLIER, THE INCOME TAX ACT WAS AMEND ED AND SECTION 268A HAS BEEN INTRODUCED ON THE STATUTE BOO K WITH RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT. SECTION 268A CARVES OUT AN EX CEPTION FOR FILING OF APPEALS AND REFERENCES UNDER SECTION 260 A OF THE ACT. THE LEGISLATURE HAS PRESCRIBED THAT THE CBDT IS EMP OWERED TO ISSUE CIRCULARS AND INSTRUCTIONS FROM TIME TO TIME, WITH REGARD TO FILING OF APPEALS DEPENDING ON THE TAX EFFECT INVOL VED. THEREAFTER, IN 2008, CBDT INSTRUCTION NO. 5 OF 2008 DATED 15TH MAY, 2008 WAS ISSUED. THIS COURT IN THE CASE OF 'CO MMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX V/S MADHUKAR K. INAMDAR (HUF) REPORTE D IN '(2010) 229 CTR (BOM) 77, INTERPRETED THE AFORESAID CIRCULAR. THE CIRCULAR WAS ISSUED IN SUPERSESSION OF ALL EARL IER INSTRUCTIONS ISSUED BY THE BOARD. THE MONETARY LIMI T WAS INCREASED AND APPEALS WERE TO BE FILED UNDER SECTIO N 260A, THEREAFTER, ONLY IN CASES WHERE THE TAX EFFECT EXCE EDED RS. 4 46 LACS. PARAGRAPH 11 OF THAT INSTRUCTION STIPULATED T HAT IT WAS APPLICABLE TO APPEALS FILED ON OR AFTER 15TH MAY, 2 008. IT WAS FURTHER PROVIDED THAT IN CASES, WHERE APPEALS WERE FILED BEFORE 15TH MAY, 2008, THEY WOULD BE GOVERNED BY THE INSTR UCTIONS ON THIS SUBJECT WHICH WERE OPERATIVE AT THE TIME WHEN SUCH APPEALS WERE FILED. THE INSTRUCTION WAS ISSUED UNDE R SECTION 268A(1) OF THE ACT. THE ARGUMENT OF THE LEARNED COU NSEL FOR THE REVENUE IN THAT CASE WAS, THAT THE INSTRUCTION ISSU ED ON 15TH MAY, 2008 DID NOT PRECLUDE THE DEPARTMENT FROM CONT INUING WITH THE APPEALS AND/OR PETITIONS FILED PRIOR TO 15TH MA Y, 2008, IF THEY INVOLVED A SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW OF A RE CURRING NATURE, NOTWITHSTANDING THE FACT THAT THE TOTAL CUM ULATIVE TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN THE APPEALS WAS LESS THAN RS. 4 LACS. IT WAS SUBMITTED, SUCH APPEALS WHICH WERE FILED PRIOR TO T HE ISSUANCE OF INSTRUCTION AND WHERE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF L AW WERE RAISED, WERE REQUIRED TO BE DECIDED ON MERITS. THE COURT, WHILE CONSIDERING THE ISSUE OBSERVED THAT PARAGRAPH 5 OF THE CIRCULAR MADE IT CLEAR THAT NO APPEALS WOULD BE FILED IN THE CASES INVOLVING TAX EFFECT LESS THAN RS. 4 LACS NOTWITHST ANDING THE ISSUE BEING OF RECURRING NATURE. RELYING ON THE JUD GEMENT IN CIT V/S POLYCOTT CORPORATION, THE COURT OBSERVED AS FOL LOWS: '6 THE AFORESAID JUDICIAL VERDICT MAKES IT CLEAR THAT THE CIRCULAR DT. 15TH MAY, 2008 IN GENERAL AND PARA (5) THEREOF IN PARTICULAR LAY DOWN THAT EVEN IF THE SAME ISSUE, IN RESPECT OF SAME ASSESSEE, FOR OTHER ASSESSMENT YEARS IS INVOLVED, E VEN THEN THE DEPARTMENT SHOULD NOT FILE APPEAL, IF THE TAX EFFEC T IS LESS THAN RS. 4 LAKHS. IN OTHER WORDS, EVEN IF THE QUESTION O F LAW IS OF RECURRING NATURE EVEN THEN, THE REVENUE IS NOT EXPE CTED TO FILE APPEALS IN SUCH CASES, IF THE TAX IMPACT IS LESS TH AN THE MONETARY LIMIT FIXED BY THE CBDT.' 7. ONE FAILS TO UNDERSTAND HOW THE REVENUE, ON THE FACE OF THE ABOVE CLEAR INSTRUCTIONS OF THE CBDT, CAN CONTEND T HAT THE 47 CIRCULAR DT. 15TH MAY, 2008 ISSUED BY THE CBDT IS A PPLICABLE TO THE CASES FILED AFTER 15TH MAY, 2008 AND IN COMPLIA NCE THEREOF, THEY DO NOT FILE APPEALS, IF THE TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN RS. 4 LAKHS; BUT THE SAID CIRCULAR IS NOT APPLICABLE TO THE CASE S FILED PRIOR TO 15TH MAY, 2008 I.E. TO THE OLD PENDING APPEALS, EVE N IF THE TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN RS. 4 LAKHS. IN OUR VIEW, THERE IS NO LOGIC BEHIND THIS BELIEF ENTERTAINED BY THE REVENUE.' THE COURT HAS FURTHER HELD THAT THE PREVAILING INST RUCTIONS FIXING THE MONETARY LIMIT FOR THE TAX EFFECT WOULD HOLD GO OD EVEN FOR PENDING CASES. ACCORDINGLY, THE COURT DISMISSED ALL THE APPEALS HAVING A TAX EFFECT OF LESS THAN RS. 4 LACS. 10. THE NEW CBDT INSTRUCTIONS HAVE BEEN ISSUED ON 9 TH FEBRUARY, 2011, BEING INSTRUCTION NO. 3 OF 2011. TH E MONETARY LIMIT HAS BEEN RAISED AGAIN AND CLAUSE 3 OF THE INS TRUCTIONS PROVIDES THAT APPEALS SHALL NOT BE FILED IN CASES W HERE THE TAX EFFECT DOES NOT EXCEED THE MONETARY LIMITS PRESCRIB ED, HENCEFORTH. THE MONETARY LIMITS PRESCRIBED FOR FILI NG AN APPEAL UNDER SECTION 260A BEFORE THE HIGH COURT HAS BEEN R AISED TO RS. 10 LACS. THIS INSTRUCTION IS IDENTICAL TO THE CBDT INSTRUCTION NO. 5 OF 2008. CLAUSE 10 OF THIS CIRCULAR INDICATES THA T MONETARY LIMITS WOULD NOT APPLY TO WRIT MATTERS AND DIRECT T AX MATTERS OTHER THAN INCOME TAX. IT FURTHER PROVIDES THAT WHE RE THE TAX EFFECT IS NOT QUANTIFIABLE, THE DEPARTMENT SHOULD T AKE A DECISION TO FILE APPEALS ON MERITS OF EACH CASE. CLAUSE 11, AGAIN PROVIDES THAT THE INSTRUCTION WOULD APPLY TO APPEALS FILED O N OR AFTER ....2011 AND APPEALS FILED BEFORE ...... 2011 WOULD BE GOVERNED BY THE INSTRUCTIONS ON THIS SUBJECT, OPERATIVE AT T HE TIME WHEN SUCH APPEALS WERE FILED. 11. IN OUR OPINION, WHEN A SIMILAR CLAUSE HAS BEEN INTERPRETED BY THE DIVISION BENCH OF THIS COURT IN CIT VS. MADH UKARINAMDAR (SUPRA), THE SAME PRINCIPLES MUST APPLY IN THE PRES ENT CASES 48 ALSO, AS WE HAVE FOUND THAT THE INSTRUCTIONS OF 15T H MAY, 2008 IS PARA- MATERIAL WITH THE INSTRUCTION OF 9TH FEBRU ARY, 2011. 14. SIMILARLY, THE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF 'COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX V/S DELHI RACE CLUB LTD.', DECIDED ON MARCH 03, 2011, BY RELYING ON ITS EARLIER JUDGEMENT 'COMMISSI ONER INCOME TAX DELHI-III V/S M/S P.S. JAIN AND CO. DECIDED ON 2ND AUGUST, 2010 HAS HELD THAT THE CBDT CIRCULAR RAISING THE MO NETARY LIMIT OF THE TAX EFFECT TO RS. 10 LACS WOULD BE APPLICABL E TO PENDING CASES ALSO. 17. IT IS TRUE THAT THIS JUDGEMENT IN CHHAJER'S CAS E (SUPRA) WAS NOT BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF THE DIVISION BENCH, WH ILE DECIDING EITHER MADHUKAR'S CASE (SUPRA) OR THE CASE OF POLYC OT CORPORATION (SUPRA). HOWEVER, THE INSTRUCTION OF 2005 WHICH WAS CONSIDERED IN CHHAJER'S CASE HAS ALSO BEEN INTERPRETED IN POLY COT CORPORATION (SUPRA). THE CONSISTENT VIEW OF THE COU RT HAS BEEN THAT THE CBDT INSTRUCTION WOULD APPLY TO PENDING CA SES AS WELL. THE MAIN OBJECTIVE OF SUCH INSTRUCTIONS IS TO REDUC E THE PENDING LITIGATION WHERE THE TAX EFFECT IS CONSIDERABLY SMA LL. THEREFORE, IN OUR OPINION, THE TAX APPEALS ARE REQUIRED TO BE DIS MISSED, AS THEY ARE NOT MAINTAINABLE IN VIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 268A OF THE INCOME TAX, AND THE CBDT INSTRUCTION NO . 3 OF 2011.' 7. THE SAME VIEW HAS BEEN TAKEN BY THE KARNATAKA HI GH COURT IN ITA NO.3191 OF 2005 IN THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOM E- TAX VS. M/S. RANKA&RANKA DECIDED ON 2.11.2011, WHEREIN THE DIVISION BENCH HAS CONSIDERED INSTRUCTION NO.3 AND THE NATIO NAL LITIGATION, POLICY, HAD HELD AS UNDER: '(I) INSTRUCTION NO.3/11 IS ALSO APPLICABLE TO THE PENDING APPEALS. (II) AS THE TAX EFFECT IN THE INSTANT CASE IS LESS THAN RS.10 LAKHS, THE APPEAL STANDS DISMISSED ON THE GROUND OF MONETARY L IMIT, 49 WITHOUT EXPRESSING ANY OPINION ON THE MERITS OF THE CLAIM, MAKING IT CLEAR THAT THE DEPARTMENT IS AT LIBERTY T O PROCEED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE IN FUTURE, IF THERE ANY AMOUNT DUE FROM THE ASSESSEE, ON SIMILAR ISSUE AND IF IT IS ABOVE THE M ONETARY LIMIT PRESCRIBED.' 5. WE ALSO FIND FROM THE ABOVE CASE LAW OF HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF SURESH CHANDRA DURGAPRASAD KHA TOD (HUF) ( SUPRA ) THAT IN THE SIMILAR SITUATION, EXACTLY IDENTICAL INSTRUCTIONS WERE APPLIED TO THE APPEALS FILED RETROSPECTIVELY. HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT HAS DISCUSSED THAT ALMOST ALL HIGH COURT S ARE OF THE UNANIMOUS VIEW, CONSIDERING THE MAIN OBJECTIVE OF S UCH INSTRUCTIONS THAT TO REDUCE THE PENDING LITIGATION, WHERE THE TAX EFFECT IS CONSIDERABLE LOW OR SMALL, THE APPEAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE. THE RECENT INSTRUCTION REVISING THE MONETARY LIMIT TO RS. 10 LAKHS FOR FILING APPEAL BEFORE ITAT ON INCOME TAX MATTERS , AS ISSUED VIDE THE ABOVE CIRCULAR WILL APPLY TO PENDING APPEALS AL SO FOR THE REASON THAT THE SAME IS EXACTLY IDENTICAL TO EARLIE R INSTRUCTIONS. 6. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSION AND THE LATEST C IRCULAR ISSUED BY THE CBDT, AS REPRODUCED ABOVE, SINCE THE TAX EFF ECT INVOLVED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL IS BELOW THE MONETARY LIMIT, THE REFORE, WE 50 DISMISS THIS DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL IN LIMINE BEING NOT MAINTAINABLE. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE STAND DISMISSED, BEING NOT MAINTAINABLE. 8. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. AUTHORISED REPRESENTAT IVES FOR ASSESSEE ON THE ISSUES RAISED IN CROSS OBJECTIONS F ILED BY ASSESSEE. WE HAVE ALSO CONSIDERED THE WRITTEN SUBMI SSIONS. AFTER HEARING BOTH SIDES, WE DISMISS ALL THE CROSS OBJECT IONS. PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 21 ST DECEMBER, 2015 SD/- SD/- (D.T. GARASIA) (B.C. MEENA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER 21 ST DECEMBER, 2015
