ITO, Trichy V. P.Sairam, Trichy

ITA 849/CHNY/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4786 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-06-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 27-06-2011
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 02-06-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P B SEKARAN
• Assessee Lawyers: S SRIDHAR
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHENNAI BENCH B : CHENNAI [BEFORE DR. O.K. NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI HARI OM MARATHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER] I.T.A NO.849/MDS/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06 THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER WARD I(1) TRICHY VS SHRI P. SAIRAM 79, PARAMASIVAPURAM LALGUDI TRICHY [PAN AAMPS3064N ] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI P.B.SEKARAN, CIT RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S.SRIDHAR, ADVOCATE O R D E R PER HARI OM MARATHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE, FOR ASSESSMENT YEA R 2005-06, IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), TIRUC HIRAPPALLI, DATED 15.3.2010. 2. IT IS SEEN THAT THE TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL IS LESS THAN ` 3 LAKHS. INSTRUCTION NO.3 OF 2011 DATED 9 TH FEB.,2011 ISSUED BY THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES, UNDER SEC.268A(1) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961, HAS GIVEN DIRECTIONS NOT TO F ILE APPEALS BEFORE ITA 849/10 :- 2 -: THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL WHERE THE TAX EFF ECT DOES NOT EXCEED ` 3 LAKHS. 3. THE FIRST INSTRUCTION NO.1093 DATED 28.10.1992 ISSUED BY THE BOARD, HAD LAID DOWN SUCH LIMIT AT ` 25,000/-. THEREAFTER THROUGH INSTRUCTION NO. 1979 DATED 27.3.2000, THE SAID LIMI T WAS ENHANCED TO ` 1,00,000/-. SUBSEQUENTLY THE LIMIT WAS AGAIN INCRE ASED TO ` 2 LAKHS THROUGH INSTRUCTION NO.2 DATED 24.10.2005. 4. IN THE LIGHT OF THE ABOVE EARLIER INSTRUCTIONS, WHEN THE APPEALS WERE DISPOSED OF BY THE TRIBUNAL IN LIMINE ON THE G ROUND OF NON- MAINTAINABILITY, ISSUES WERE TAKEN UP BEFORE THE HO N'BLE HIGH COURTS. THE HON'BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V S CAMCO COLOUR CO. (254 ITR 565) HAS HELD THAT WHERE THE REVENUE EFFECT INVOLVED IN THE APPEAL IS BELOW THE PRESCRIBED LIMIT, THE APPEA L IS NOT MAINTAINABLE BEFORE THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL. THEREAFTER THE HON' BLE MADRAS HIGH COURT IN CWT VS. ANNAMALI (258 ITR 675) HELD THAT T HE LIMIT PRESCRIBED IN THE LATEST INSTRUCTION IS APPLICABLE NOT ONLY TO THE APPEALS TO BE FILED AFTER THE ISSUE OF SUCH INSTRUCTIONS, BUT ALSO APPL ICABLE TO THE PENDING APPEALS. THIS VIEW WAS AGAIN FOLLOWED BY THE HON'B LE MADRAS HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS ASSOCIATED ELECTRICAL AGENCIES (295 ITR 496). THE HON'BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT ALSO HAS HELD THE SAME VIEW IN ITA 849/10 :- 3 -: THE CASE OF CIT VS PITHWA ENGG. WORKS (276 ITR 519 ) AND IN THE CASE OF CIT VS ZOEB Y. TOPPIWALA (284 ITR 379). 5. THUS, THE COURTS HAVE CONSISTENTLY HELD THAT WHE RE THE TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN THE PRESCRIBED LIMIT, APPEALS ARE NOT MAINTAINABLE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AND HAVE ALSO HELD THAT THE LATEST SUC H INSTRUCTIONS ARE APPLICABLE EVEN TO THE PENDING APPEALS. 6. THEREFORE, IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE FIND THAT THIS APPEAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE BEFORE THE TRI BUNAL. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED IN LIMINE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 29.6 .2011. SD/- SD/- (DR. O.K. NARAYANAN) VICE-PRESIDENT (HARI OM MARATHA) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 29 TH JUNE, 2011 RD COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR