ITO, Pune V. Sjhri Mane Harsihchandra Shrirang, Indapur

ITA 900/PUN/2004

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4305 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 year(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-06-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 11-10-2012
• Assessment Year: 2000-2001
• Appeal Filed On: 03-06-2004
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANN KAPTHUAMA
• Keywords: Question of law; Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES, A PUNE BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, J.M. AND SHRI R.K. PANDA, A.M. I.T.A. NO. 900/PN/2004: A.Y. 2000-01 I.T.O. WARD 5(4) PUNE .. APPELLANT VS. SHRI MANE HARISHCHANDRA SHRIRAM PROP. M/S. ATUL MANE & CO. INDAPUR MARKET YARD, INDAPUR, DIST. PUNE. PA N NOT ON RECORD. .. RESPONDENT C.O. NO. 26/PN/2005 ARISING OUT OF I.T.A. NO. 900/PN/2004: A.Y. 2000-01 SHRI MANE HARISHCHANDRA SHRIRAM PROP. M/S. ATUL MANE & CO. INDAPUR MARKET YARD, INDAPUR, DIST. PUNE. PA N NOT ON RECORD. CROSS OBJECTOR VS. I.T.O. WARD 5(4) PUNE RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY: SHRI KISHOR PHADKE DEPARTMENT BY: MS. ANN KAPTHUAMA DATE OF HEARING : 19-06-2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 20-06-2013 ORDER PER SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JM THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A)-II PUNE DATED 16-3-2004 FOR A.Y. 2000 -01 ON VARIOUS GROUNDS. 2. AT THE OUTSET OF HEARING, THE LEARNED REPRESENT ATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE RAISED A PRELIMINARY OBJECTION BY POIN TING OUT INSTRUCTION NO. 3/2011 DATED 09.02.2011 ISSUED BY T HE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES (CBDT) FIXING THE MON ETARY ITA NO. 900 AND CO 26/PN/2011 MANE HARISHCHANDRA A.Y. 2000-01 2 LIMITS FOR FILING OF DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS BEFORE TH E TRIBUNAL. IN TERMS OF THE SAID INSTRUCTION, MONETARY LIMIT FOR F ILING DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL TO THE TRIBUNAL HAS BEEN FIXED AT RS 3 LAKHS. IN OTHER WORDS, IN CASES WHERE THE TAX EFFEC T OF THE ADDITIONS DELETED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) IS LESS THAN RS 3 LAKHS, NO APPEAL SHALL BE FILED B Y THE DEPARTMENT IN SUCH CASES. ACCORDING TO THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVE, THE TAX EFFECT WITH RESPECT TO THE RELIEF ALLOWED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) IN THE CAPTIONED APPEAL IS BELOW RS 3 LAKHS. SUCH FACTUAL MATRIX HAS NOT BEEN CONTESTED BY THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIV E FOR THE REVENUE, THOUGH THE RELIEF ALLOWED BY THE COMMISSIO NER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) IS SOUGHT TO BE ASSAILED ON ME RITS. 3. WE FIND THAT IN A RECENT DECISION, THE CO-ORDINA TE BENCH OF ITAT MUMBAI, IN THE CASE OF ITO V SHRI ASHOK G. DHANDHARIAI, MUMBAI IN ITA NO. 2460/MUM/2010 DATED 28.2.2011 HELD THAT THE REVISED INSTRUCTIONS DATED 9.2.2011 (SUPRA) ARE APPLICABLE TO THE PRESENT CASES ALSO, A LTHOUGH SUCH APPEALS HAVE BEEN FILED ON A PRIOR DATE. 4. IN VIEW OF THE PRECEDENT BROUGHT OUT BY THE LEAR NED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE RESPONDENT, FACTUALLY THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL IS LIABLE TO BE CONSIDERED TO HAVE BEEN FILE D CONTRARY TO THE CBDT INSTRUCTIONS DATED 9.2.2011 (SUPRA). THE T RIBUNAL FOLLOWING THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH C OURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V MADHUKAR K. INAMDAR (HUF) 318 IT R 149 AND CIT V PITHWA ENGINEERING WORKS 276 ITR 519 (BOM ) FOUND IT APPROPRIATE TO DISMISS THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL O N THE GROUND THAT TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN RS 3 LAKHS, EV EN IN A CASE WHERE THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS WAS FILED PRIOR TO THE DATE OF THE CBDT INSTRUCTION DATED 9.2.2011 (SUPRA). THE FO LLOWING DISCUSSION IN THE ORDER IS WORTHY OF NOTICE: 5. WE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES. THE CASE OF CIT VS. CHHAJER PACKAGING & PLASTICS PVT. LTD. 300 ITR RELI ED ON BY THE DR IS DISTINGUISHABLE FROM THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE. AT PARA 12 PAGE 184 OF THE DECISION IN THE CA SE OF ITA NO. 900 AND CO 26/PN/2011 MANE HARISHCHANDRA A.Y. 2000-01 3 CHHAJER PACKAGING & PLASTICS PVT. LTD. IT HAS BEEN HELD AS FOLLOWS: OTHERWISE ALSO, PARAGRAPH OF THIS CIRCULAR ITSELF SAVES CERTAIN APPEALS FROM BEING OBSTRUCTED DUE TO FINANCIAL LIMITS. PARAGRAPH 3 READS: THE BOARD HAS ALSO DECIDED THAT IN CASES INVOLVING SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW OF IMPORTANCE AS WELL AS IN CASES WHERE THE SAME QUESTION OF LAW WILL REPEATEDLY ARISE, EITHER IN THE CASE CONCERNED OR IN SIMILAR CASES, SHOULD BE SEPARATELY CONSIDERED ON THE MERITS WITHOUT BEING HINDERED BY THE MONETARY LIMITS. IT IS EVIDENT THAT, WHENEVER THERE IS A SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW, OR QUESTION OF LAW WHICH IS LIKELY TO RECUR IN FUTURE, THE DEPARTMENT IS NOT PROHIBITED FROM FILING AND PURSUING APPEALS. WE BELIEVE THAT THE SAVING CLAUSE SAVES THE PRESENT APPEAL SINCE IT INVOLVES A QUESTION OF LAW REGARDING INTERPRETATION OF SECTION 275(1)(C) OF THE ACT, AND MORE PARTICULA RLY THE ASPECT OF MANNER IN WHICH THE LIMITATION SHOULD BE COMPUTED IN THE LIGHT OF THE SAID PROVISIONS. WE HAVE, THEREFORE, PROCEEDED TO HEAR THE ADVOCATES ON THE MERITS. IN OUR OPINION, THE CASE OF CIT V CHHAJ ER WAS WITH RESPECT OF INTERPRETATION OF 275(1)(C) OF THE ACT AND HENCE CAME UNDER THE EXCEPTION CLAUSE UNDER THE CBDT CIRCULAR AND WAS NOT OBSTRUCTED BY THE MONETARY LIMIT OF RS 3 LAKHS PRESCRIBED BY THE CIRCULAR. THEREFORE THE CASE OF 300 ITR 180 IS INAPPLICABLE TO THE FACTS OF OUR CASE. FURTHER INSTRUCTION NO. 5 DT. 15.5.2008 FIXING THE MONETARY LIMIT AT RS 2 LAKHS IS SIMILAR TO THAT OF INSTRUCTI ON NO. 3 DATED 9.2.2011 WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAS BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE IN SUPPORT OF HIS CONTENTION. SINCE BOTH THE INSTRUCTION NOS. 5 & 3 ARE IDENTICAL , THE RATIO OF THE DECISION IN THE CASE OF CIT V PITH WA ENGG. WORK WHICH DEALS WITH INSTRUCTION NO. 5 DT. 15.5.2008 SHALL EQUALLY APPLY TO THE PRESENT CASE WHICH FALLS UNDER INSTRUCTION NO. 3 DATED 9.2.2011. FOLLOWING THE RATIO OF THE DECISION IN THE CASE OF CIT V PITHWA ENGG. WORK WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT IN OUR VIEW, THE BOARDS CIRCULAR DT. 27 TH MARCH, 2000 IS VERY MUCH APPLICABLE EVEN TO THE OLD REFERENCES WHICH ARE STILL UNDECIDED, WE DISMISS THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL ON THE GROUND THAT THE TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN 3 LAKHS. FOLLOWING THE AFORESAID PRECEDENT, THE PRESENT APPE AL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED IN VIEW OF CB DT INSTRUCTION NO. 3 DATED 9.2.2011 (SUPRA) AS THE TAX EFFECT WITH RESPECT TO THE QUANTUM OF RELIEF ALLOWED BY THE COM MISSIONER ITA NO. 900 AND CO 26/PN/2011 MANE HARISHCHANDRA A.Y. 2000-01 4 OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) IS BELOW RS 3 LAKHS AND IT HAS NOT BEEN SHOWN THAT THE APPEAL FALLS UNDER ANY OF THE E XCEPTIONS PROVIDED IN PARA 8 OF THE CBDT INSTRUCTION (SUPRA). WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. 5. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED C.O. NO. 06/PN/2005 ARISI NG OUT OF APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IN ITA NO. 900/PN/20 04 FOR A.Y. 2000-01. 6. SINCE WE HAVE DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE REVENU E IN VIEW OF CBDT INSTRUCTION NO. 3 DT. 9-2-2011 AS THE TAX EFFECT WITH RESPECT TO THE QUANTUM OF RELIEF ALLOWED BY TH E CIT(A) IS BELOW RS. 3 LAKHS, THE CROSS OBJECTION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BECOMES INFRUCTUOUS. HENCE THE SAME IS DISMISSED. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL BY THE REVENUE AS WELL AS THE CROSS OBJECTION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED . DECISION IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 20-06-2 013 SD/- SD/- (R.K. PANDA (SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER PUNE DATED: 20 TH JUNE 2013 ANKAM COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. ASSESSEE 2. DEPARTMENT 3. CIT(A)-II PUNE 4. CIT-II PUNE 5. THE D.R, PUNE BENCH A PUNE BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, PUNE BENCH, PUNE