The ITO, Ward-6(3), Surat V. Smt. Nasimbanu Sohilbhai Lakhani, Dist.Surat

ITA 81/AHD/2007

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 137 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0021 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-01-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 06-01-2010
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 05-01-2007
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P ORAM
• Assessee Lawyers: S N DIVATIA
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

- 1 - IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH A AHMEDABAD BEFORE S/SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JM AND D.C.AGRAWAL, AM INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 6(3), ROOM NO.606-E, 6 TH FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MAJURA GATE, SURAT. V/S . .SMT. NASIMBANU SOHILBHAI LAKHANI, PROP. OF STAR PACKAGING INDS., DASTAN RAILWAY PHATAK, TAL. PANSANA, DIST. SURAT. PAN NO.AAFPL 5295 F (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY :- SHRI P. ORAM, SR. D.R. RESPONDENT BY:- SHRI S. N. DIVATIA, AR O R D E R PER BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER : BOTH THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL AND THE CROSS OBJECTI ON OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) I V, SURAT DATED 31 ST OCTOBER, 2006 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04. 2. ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE AN ADDITION OF RS.6,8 6,699/- ON ACCOUNT OF SUPPRESSION OF CLOSING STOCK. THE LD. CI T(A) REDUCED THE ADDITION TO RS.1,35,074/-. THE REVENUE IN THE EFFEC TIVE GROUND OF APPEAL CHALLENGED THE DELETION OF ADDITION OF RS.5,51,625/ -. ITA NO.81/AHD/2007 ALONG WITH C.O.NO.39/AHD/2007 ASST. YEAR : 2003-04 2 3. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ADMITTED THA T TAX EFFECT IS BELOW RS.2 LAKHS IN THE GROUND OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE REVENUE FOR THE PURPOSE OF FILING THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL. 4. AS PER CBDT IF THE TAX EFFECT IS BELOW RS.2 LAKHS IN THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL WHICH IS FILED BEFORE THE TRIBU NAL SUCH APPEAL WOULD NOT BE MAINTAINABLE AND WOULD NOT BE FILED BEFORE T HE TRIBUNAL. CBDT INSTRUCTIONS ARE BINDING ON THE DEPARTMENT. NO QUES TION OF LAW ARISES ON THE ABOVE GROUND OF APPEAL BECAUSE SUPPRESSION OF C LOSING STOCK IS A QUESTION OF FACT ONLY. THUS DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE AND IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED. 5. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PRESS THE C ROSS OBJECTION AS THE SAME IS DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN. 6. AS A RESULT, THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL STANDS DISM ISSED. THE CO STANDS DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN SD/- SD/- (D.C.AGRAWAL) (BHAVNESH SAINI) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) JU DICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD, DATED : 06/01/2010 MAHATA/- ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 06/01/2010 3 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO :- 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(APPEALS)- 4. THE CIT CONCERNS. 5. THE DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, DEPUTY / ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT, AHMEDABAD