DCIT, New Delhi V. M/s. Herman Fin. Properties Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 84/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2768 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-01-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 04-01-2016
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 03-01-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ROBIN RAWAL
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH C, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 84/DEL/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 INCOME TAX OFFICER, VS. M/S HERMAN FIN PROPERT IES WARD 12(1) PVT LTD., WZ-48, SHADI NEW DELHI KHAMPUR WEST PATEL NAGAR, NEW DELHI 110 008 (PAN: AAACH2542M) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SH. ROBIN RAWAL, SR. DR RESPONDENT BY : SH. CS ANAND, ADV. DATE OF HEARING : 04-1-2016 DATE OF ORDER : 04-1-2016 ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, J.M. THIS APPEAL BY THE DEPARTMENT IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 31.10.2013 OF LD. CIT(A)-XXVII, NEW DELHI PERTAININ G TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. WHETHER LD. CIT(A) WAS CORRECT ON FACTS AND CIR CUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 13, 40,000/- U/S. 68 OF THE I.T. ACT MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPL AINED SHARE APPLICATION MONEY DESPITE THE FACT THAT THERE IS PR OVED DIFFERENCE IN THE DENOMINATIONS OF THE CASH WITHDRAWAN AND CASH D EPOSITED LATER ON WHICH WAS USED FOR SHARE APPLICATION MONEY AND T HE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSITED LATER ON IS UNKNOWN? 2. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE, TO ADD, ALTER OR AME ND ANY GROUND OF APPEAL RAISED ABOVE AT THE TIME OF THE HEARING. 2. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE M ATERIAL ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT REVENUE IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE T HE TRIBUNAL HAS CHALLENGED THE DELETION OF ADDITION OF RS. 13,40,000/- U/S. 6 8 OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 VIDE GROUND NO. 1, AS AFORESAID. ITA NO. 84/DEL/2014 2 3. FROM THE ABOVE, WE FIND THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN THE REVENUES APPEAL IS LESS THAN RS.10,00,000/-, THEREFORE, THE DEPARTMENTS AP PEAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE, IN VIEW OF THE CIRCULAR NO. 21/2015 DATED 10 TH DECEMBER, 2015 ISSUED VIDE F.NO. 279/MISC. 142/2007-ITJ (PT.) BY THE CBDT. FO R THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, THE RELEVANT PARA NOS. 3 & 10 OF THE AFORESAID CBDT S 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. 4. 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. 84/DEL/2014 3 5. 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. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE STAN DS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 04/1/2016. SD/- SD/- (PRASHANT MAHARISHI) (H.S. SIDHU) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIA L MEMBER DATED: 04/1/2016 *SR BHATNAGAR* COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR