ACIT, New Delhi V. M/s. Richa & Co., New Delhi

ITA 89/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6823 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 1 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-02-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 12-01-2016
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 03-01-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: CBDT; PROVISIONS CONTAINED SH
• Keywords: Retrospective amendment; Tax effect
• Section: 12A

Judgement Text

1 ITA NO. 89/DEL/2014 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: F NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N. K. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 89/DEL/2014 ( A.Y 2009-10) ACIT CIRCLE-27(1) NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) VS RICHA & CO. 2/2, WHS, KIRTI NAGAR NEW DELHI AAAFR0114L (RESPONDENT) ORDER PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE DEPARTMENT AGAINST THE ORD ER DATED 15/10/2013 OF LD. CIT (A)-XIII, NEW DELHI. 2. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LEARNED COUNSE L FOR THE ASSESSEE AT THE VERY OUTSET STATED THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN THIS APPEAL IS LESS THAN RS.10,00,000/-, THEREFORE, THE DEPARTMENT OUGHT NOT TO HAVE FILED THIS APPEAL IN V IEW OF THE CIRCULAR ISSUED BY THE CBDT AND THE PROVISIONS CONTAINED APPELLANT BY SH. BALWAN CHAUHAN CIT (DR) RESPONDENT BY SH. K. VS. S. R. KRIHSNA, CA DATE OF HEARING 16.02.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 16.02.2016 2 ITA NO. 89/DEL/2014 IN SECTION 268A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREIN AFTER TO BE REFERRED AS THE ACT). 3. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. D.R., ALTHOUGH SUPPOR TED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, BUT COULD NOT CONTR OVERT THIS FACT THAT TAX EFFECT IN THIS APPEAL IS LESS THAN RS .10,00,000/-. 4. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PA RTIES AND THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD, IT IS NOTICED THA T SECTION 268A HAS BEEN INSERTED BY THE FINANCE ACT, 2008 WIT H RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT FROM 01/04/99. THE SAID SECTIO N 268 OF THE ACT PROVIDES THAT THE BOARD MAY ISSUE INSTRUCTI ON OR DIRECTIONS TO THE OTHER INCOME-TAX AUTHORITIES FIXI NG MONETARY LIMITS FOR NOT FILING THE APPEALS BEFORE THE APPELL ATE TRIBUNAL OR THE COURTS, SAID INSTRUCTIONS/DIRECTIONS ARE BIN DING ON THE INCOME TAX AUTHORITIES. 5. IT IS NOTICED THAT THE CBDT HAS ISSUED CIRCULAR NO.21 OF 2015 DATED 10.12.2015, VIDE WHICH IT HAS REVISED TH E MONETARY LIMIT TO RS.10,00,000/- FOR NOT FILING TH E APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE SA ID CIRCULAR READS AS UNDER: 3 ITA NO. 89/DEL/2014 .. ... 3. HENCEFORTH, APPEALS/ SLPS SHALL NOT BE FILED IN CASES WHERE THE TAX EFFECT DOES NOT EXCEED THE MONETARY LIMITS GIVEN HEREUNDER: S. NO APPEALS IN INCOME -TAX MATTER 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 C ASES IS TO BE DECIDED ON MERITS OF THE CASE. 9. THE MONETARY LIMITS SPECIFIED IN PARA 3 ABOVE SH ALL NOT APPLY TO WRIT MATTERS AND DIRECT TAX MATTERS OT HER 4 ITA NO. 89/DEL/2014 THAN INCOME TAX. FILING OF APPEALS IN OTHER DIRECT TAX MATTERS SHALL CONTINUE TO BE GOVERNED BY RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF STATUTE & RULES. FURTHER, FILING OF A PPEAL IN CASES OF INCOME TAX, WHERE THE TAX EFFECT IS NOT QUANTIFIABLE OR NOT INVOLVED, SUCH AS THE CASE OF REGISTRATION OF TRUSTS OR INSTITUTIONS UNDER SECTIO N 12A OF THE IT ACT, 1961, SHALL NOT BE GOVERNED BY THE LIMI TS SPECIFIED IN PARA 3 ABOVE AND DECISION TO FILE APP EAL IN SUCH CASES MAY BE TAKEN ON MERITS OF A PARTICULAR C ASE. 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 WITHDRA WN/ 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. 6. FROM CLAUSE 10 OF THE ABOVE SAID CIRCULAR IT IS CLEAR THAT THESE INSTRUCTIONS ARE APPLICABLE TO THE PENDING AP PEALS ALSO AND AS PER CLAUSE 3, THERE IS CLEAR CUT INSTRUCTION TO THE DEPARTMENT TO WITHDRAW OR NOT TO PRESS THE APPEALS FILED BEFORE THE ITAT WHEREIN TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN RS. 10,00,000/-. THESE INSTRUCTIONS ARE OPERATIVE RETROSPECTIVELY TO THE PENDING APPEALS. 5 ITA NO. 89/DEL/2014 7. KEEPING IN VIEW THE CBDT CIRCULAR NO.21 OF 2015 DATED 10.12.2015 AND ALSO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 268A OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE REVENUE SHOULD NOT HAVE FILED THE INSTANT APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 8. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WITHOUT GOING INTO MERITS OF THE CASE, WE DISMISS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT . 9. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT IS DISMI SSED. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 16/02/2016) SD/- SD/- (N. K. SAINI) (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 16/01/2016 *R. NAHEED* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI 6 ITA NO. 89/DEL/2014 DATE 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 16.02.2016 PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 16.02.2016 PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER .01.2016 JM/AM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER. .02.2016 JM/AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS .02.2016 PS/PS 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON .02.2016 PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK 17.02.2016 PS 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE AR 9. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK. 10. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER.