Income Tax Officer, V. Shri Ramesh Kumar Singh,

ITA 98/JAB/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 74781 (ITAT-JABALPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-03-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 21-11-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VED PRAKASH MISHRA
• Keywords: Question of law; Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JABALPUR BENCH, JABALPUR BEFORE : SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI T.S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 98/JAB/2012 ASST. YEAR : 2005-06 INCOME-TAX OFFICER, VS. SHRI RAMESH KUMAR SINGH , WARD 2, REWA. PROP. M/S. MAHARAJA HOTEL, NEAR BUS STAND, SINGRAULI. DISTT. SINGRAULI (MP) (PAN : AJNPS 3023 K) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI VED PRAKASH MISHRA, D.R. RESPONDENT BY : NONE DATE OF HEARING : 27.03.2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27.03.2014 ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M.: THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF LD. CIT(A), JABALPUR DATED 25.01.2012 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2 005-06, CHALLENGING THE DELETION OF ADDITION OF RS.7,68,399/- ON ACCOUNT OF DISCREPANCIES IN BALANCE SHEET UNDER CASH IN HAND AND BANK. 2. THE LD. CIT(A) WHILE ADMITTING THE ADDITIONAL EV IDENCE U/R. 46A FOUND THAT THE AO HAS NOT ADVERSELY COMMENTED UPON THE EVIDENC E. IT WAS FOUND THAT THE CASH BALANCE WAS BROUGHT FORWARD FROM EARLIER YEARS AND ACCORDINGLY, THE ADDITION OF ITA NO. 98/JAB/2012 2 RS.7,68,399/- WAS DELETED. ACCORDING TO CBDT INSTRU CTION NO. 03/2011 DATED 09.02.2011, IT IS DIRECTED THAT THE DEPTT. APPEALS SHALL NOT BE FILED BEFORE THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN CASE WHERE THE TAX EFFECT DOES NOT EXCEED THE MONETARY LIMIT OF RS.3,00,000/-. THE DEPARTMENTAL A PPEAL IS FILED ON 21.11.2012 AND THEREFORE, THE ABOVE INSTRUCTION APPLIES TO THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL. ADMITTEDLY, THE TAX EFFECT IN THE DEPARTMENTAL APPE AL IS BELOW RS.3.00 LACS. THEREFORE, THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL IS NOT MAINTAINA BLE. NO QUESTION OF LAW OR VALIDITY OF ANY NOTIFICATION, CIRCULAR ETC. OR AUDI T OBJECTION HAVE BEEN CHALLENGED. THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL IS, ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL IS DISMIS SED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (T.S. KAPOOR) (BHAVNESH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER *AKS/- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A), CONCERNED BY ORDER 4. CIT, CONCERNED 5. DR, ITAT, JABALPUR 6. GUARD FILE SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, CAMP AT JABALPUR