ITO WARD - 22(2), New Delhi V. SUNIL MANCHANDA, NEW DELHI

ITA 9871/DEL/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1235 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 9 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-10-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 10-10-2022
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 29-12-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.9871/Del/2019 (Assessment Year 2011-12) ITO Ward – 22(2) New Delhi PAN No. AAJPK 4370 N Vs. Sunil Manchanda Shop No.6, FF, Ch. Kishan Chand Complex, Jawalaheri Market, Ashim Vihar New Delhi-110 063 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Assessee by Shri Vikash Jain, Adv. Revenue by Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT-D.R. Date of hearing: 11.10.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 11.10.2022 PER ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM : This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 03.10.2019 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, New Delhi under Section 147/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeals: i. “Whether on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.68,99,748/- made by the AO on account of Long Term Capital Gain u/s 10(38) of the I.T. Act, 1961 being a penny stock case and is covered by the exception provided by the circular no.23/2019 dated 06.09.2019 and further office memorandum dated 16.09.2019. ii. That the Appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend any of the ground(s) of Appeal before or during the course of hearing of the appeal.” Page 2 of 4 3. At the time of hearing Learned AR submitted that the tax effect in the present appeal of Revenue is less than the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT for filing the appeal to which Learned DR fairly admitted that the tax effect is less than the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT for filing the appeal. 4. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. On perusing the grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue, we find that Revenue is aggrieved by the order of Learned CIT(A) in respect of the relief given by him. We find that CBDT vide Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 had increased the limit for filing appeal before ITAT at Rs. 20 lakhs. The limit for filing the appeal before ITAT and other authorities were enhanced by CBDT vide Circular No.17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019. As per the aforesaid CBDT Circular dated 08.08.2019, no Department appeal is to be filed against relief given by the Learned CIT(A) before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal unless the tax effect, excluding interest, exceeds Rs.50 lakhs. We find that in the present case, the tax effect involved is less than Rs.50 lakhs. In the absence of any material placed on record by the Revenue to demonstrate that the issue in the present appeal is covered by exceptions provided in para 10 of the aforesaid CBDT Circular of 11.07.2018, we are of the view that the monetary limit prescribed by the instructions of the CDBT Circular dated 08.08.2019 would be applicable to the present appeal of the Department. We therefore hold the present appeal of Revenue to be not maintainable on account of low tax effect. However, in case there is any error in the computation of the tax effect involved or if for any reason, the aforesaid CBDT Circular is not applicable, it would be open to the Revenue to seek revival of the appeal. Thus the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. Page 3 of 4 5. In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 11.10.2022 Sd/- Sd/- (ANUBHAV SHARMA) (ANIL CHATURVEDI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Date:- 11.10.2022 PY* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI