INCOME TAX OFFICER 31(3)(2), MUMBAI V. TARUN S KANDHARI, MUMBAI

ITA 932/MUM/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3233 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-02-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 16-02-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: ARUN KUMAR SINGH
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL E BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, AM AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM ITA NO. 932 /MUM/ 2018 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011 - 12 ) INCOME TAX OFFICER 31(3)(2) C - 13, 408 - D, PRATYAKSHAKAR BHAVAN, BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX, BANDRA (E), MUMBAI - 400 051 VS. SHRI TARUN S. KANDHARI FLAT NO. 102, PLEASANT PARK, EVERSHINE NAGAR, MALAD (W), MUMBAI - 400 064 PAN/GIR NO. AAHPK 6057 G ( APPELLANT ) : ( RESPONDENT ) APPELLANT BY : SHRI CHAUDHARY ARUN KUMAR SINGH RESPONDENT BY : NONE DATE OF HEARING : 14.02.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27.02 .2019 O R D E R PER SHAMIM YAHYA, A. M.: THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 41, MUMBAI (LD.CIT(A) FOR SHORT) DATED 06.11.2017 AND PERTAINS TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR (A.Y.) 2011 - 12. 2. THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL AGAINST THE DELETION OF ADDITION BY THE LD. COMMI SSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) OF THE LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN OF RS.94,47,713/ - BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 3. AT TH E OUTSET, IT TRANSPIRES THAT THE TAX EFFECT OF THE RELIEF GRANTED BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) IS BELOW RS.20 LACS, AS PER THE LIMIT FIXED BY THE CBDT FOR FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE ITAT VIDE CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 3/2018, F. NO. 279/MISC.1 42/2007 - ITJ (PT) DATED 11 TH JULY, 2018 ISSUED BY CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA. 2 ITA NO. 932/MUM/2018 4. NONE APPEARED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE DESPITE NOTICE SENT. THE NOTICE SENT HAS RETURNED UNSERVED WITH A REMARK NOT KNOWN. HENCE, WE PROCEEDED TO ADJUDICATE THE ISSUE BY HEARING THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND PERUSING THE RECORDS. 5. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE ORDER OF THE LD. C IT(A) AND THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. IT HAS BEEN FOUND THA T THE TAX EFFECT IN THE APPEAL IS LESS THAN RS. 20 LACS. 6 . THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (LD. DR FOR SHORT) FAIRLY AGREED TO THE ABOVE PROPOSITION THA T TH IS APPEAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE IN LIGHT OF THE ABOVE SAID CBDT CIRCULAR. HE ALSO DID NOT POINT THAT TH IS APPEAL FALL IN THE EXCEPTIONS CARVED OUT IN THE ABOVE SAID CIRCULAR. ACCORDINGLY, TH IS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE STANDS DISMISSED. 7. IN THE RES ULT, THI S APPEAL BY THE REVENUE STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 2 7 . 0 2 . 2 0 1 9 S D / - S D / - ( PAWAN SINGH ) (SHAMIM YAHYA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED : 2 7 . 0 2 . 2 0 1 9 ROSHANI , SR. PS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. CIT - CONCERNED 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER, (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) ITAT, MUMBAI