The Income Tax Officer, MANSA V. Sh. Radhey Sham, MANSA

ITA 76/ASR/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1429 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-12-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 21-12-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 07-02-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R K SHARDA
• Assessee Lawyers: P N ARORA
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR BEFORE SH. A.D.JAIN, HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. T.S. KAPOOR, HONBLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A NO. 76(ASR)/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -1(4), MANSA VS. SH. RADHEY SHAM, S/O BRIJ LAL, MANSA, W.NO.17, NEAR M.C. PARK, MANSA. PAN: CMKPS4217J (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SH. R.K. SHARDA (DR.) RESPONDENT BY: SH. P. N. ARORA (ADV.) DATE OF HEARING: 21.12.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 21.12.2015 ORDER PER T.S. KAPOOR(AM): THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE LEARNED CIT(A), BATHINDA, DATED 4.11.2013 FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2008-0 9, WHEREIN THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS DELETED THE ADDITION OF RS.17,49 ,000/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE RAISED A PRELIMINARY OBJECTION THAT THE TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN THE REVENUS APPEAL IS LESS THAN RS.10 LACS. THEREFORE, THE PRESENT APP EALS FILED BY THE 2 DEPARTMENT MAY BE DISMISSED, AS THE SAME ARE NOT MA INTAINABLE BEING CONTRARY TO CBDTS INSTRUCTION NO.21 OF 2015 DATED 10.12.2015. 3. THE LD. DR HOWEVER, RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF TH E ASSESSING OFFICER. 4. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES, IT IS SEEN THAT TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IS LESS THAN RS,10,00,000/-. HENCE, AS PER CBDT INSTRUCTION NO. 21 OF 2015, DATED 10 TH DEC., 2015, WHICH IS BINDING ON THE DEPARTMENT, THE DEPARTMENT IS PRECLUDED FROM FILING THE PRESENT APPEAL, AS THIS INSTRUCTION IS APPLICABLE RETROSPECTIVELY. THEREFORE, IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, THE SAID INSTRUCTION OF CBDT IS BINDING UPON THE DEPARTMENT AND THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED CO NTRARY TO THE SAID INSTRUCTION ISSUED BY THE CBDT. ACCORDINGLY, THE AP PEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED, AS NOT MAINTAINABLE. 5. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE RE VENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE CONCLUSIO N OF HEARING, IS PRONOUNCED ON THIS DAY OF 21 ST DECEMBER, 2015. SD/- SD/- (A.D. JAIN) (T. S. KAPOOR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT ME MBER DATED: 21.12.2015. /PK/ PS. 3 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: (1) THE ASSESSEE: (2) THE (3) THE CIT(A), (4) THE CIT, (5) THE SR DR, I.T.A.T., TRUE COPY BY ORDER (ASSISTANT REGISTRAR) INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AMRITSAR BENCH: AMRITSAR.