ITO, New Delhi V. Sh. Pawan Kumar Behal, New Delhi

ITSSA 16/DEL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 122 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1708 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 9 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-03-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 09-03-2016
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 20-05-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KARTAR SINGH
• Keywords: Competent authority; Block assessment; Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : F : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI J.S. REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND S HRI LALIET KUMAR , JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 5779 /DEL /20 1 3 [ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 0 9 - 10 ] THE I.T .O VS. SHRI PRADEEP AGGARWAL WARD - 25 ( 2 ) A - 1/12, KESHAV PURAM NEW DELHI DELHI PAN : A GTPA 8675 J CO NO. 2 32 /DEL/2014 [A/O ITA NO. 5779 /DEL /201 3 [ ASSESSMENT YEAR: 200 9 - 10 ] SHRI PRADEEP AGGARWAL VS. THE I.T .O A - 1/12, KESHAV PURAM WARD - 25(2) DELHI NEW DELHI PAN : AGTPA 8675 J DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI KARTAR SINGH, CIT - DR ASSESSEE BY : MS. MEENU AGARWAL ADV IT SS A NO. 16 /DEL /201 3 [ BLOCK ASSESSMENT YEAR: 1.4.1996 TO 10.8.2002 ] THE I.T .O VS. SHRI PAWAN KUMAR B EHAL WARD 39(1) 8752/14 - B, SHIDIPURA NEW DELHI KAROL BAGH, NEW DELHI PAN : A AGPK 3849 M [APPELLANT] [ RESPONDENT] DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI KARTAR SINGH, CIT - DR ASSESSEE BY : ARUN MISHRA, ADV 2 DATE OF HEARING : 0 3 . 0 3 .201 6 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 1 1 . 0 3 .2016 ORDER PER LALIET KUMAR, JM : - BOTH T HESE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST SEPARATE ORDER S OF THE LD. CIT(A) PERTAINING TO DIFFERENT ASSESSEES AND ASSESSMENT YEARS . C ROSS OBJECTION S HAVE ALSO BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN CASE OF PRADEE P AGGARWAL . SINCE THE ISSUES INVOLVED IN THESE APPEALS ARE SIMILAR AND THE APPEALS AND CROSS OBJECTION WERE HEARD TOGETHER, SO THESE ARE BEING DISPOSED OFF BY THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 2. TH ESE APPEAL S AND CROSS OBJECTION HA VE BEEN FIXED FOR HEARING IN VIEW OF THE RECENT CBDT INSTRUCTION NO. 21/2015 DATED 10.12.2015, REVISING THE MONETARY LIMIT OF RS.10.00 LA KH S FOR NOT FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL IN TERMS OF SECTION 268A(1) OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT. 3 3. THE CBDT IN ITS RECENT CIRCULAR NO. 21/2015 DATED 10.12.2015 HAS PROVIDED THAT NO DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL SHALL BE FILED BEFORE THE 1TAT WHEREIN THE TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IS LESS THAN RS.10 LAKHS. FURTHER, IN PARA 10 OF THE CIRCULAR, IT IS PROVIDED THAT THIS INSTRUCTION WOU LD APPLY RETROSPECTIVELY AND THE PENDING APPEALS BELOW THE SPECIFIED TAX LIMIT OF RS.10 LAKH S MAY BE WITHDRAWN/NOT PRESSED. 4. THE LEARNED CIT - DR APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE BEFORE US, AT THE OUTSET, SUBMITTED THAT APPEAL S CAN BE WITHDRAWN ONLY AFTER GETTING THE APPROVAL OF COMPETENT AUTHORITY. HE FURTHER REFERRED TO PARA 7 OF THE CIRCULAR TO SUBMIT THAT DISMISSAL OF APPEAL, HOWEVER, IN ANY CASE, ON ACCOUNT OF LOW TAX EFFECT SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED AS A PRECEDENCE IN THE M ATTERS OF SUBSEQUENT YEARS WHERE THE TAX EFFECT IS ABOVE THE MONETARY LIMIT PRESCRIBED BY THIS CIRCULAR AND THE ISSUE SHOULD BE DECIDED ON MERITS. 5. THE LEARNED COUNSEL S FOR THE ASSESSEE, ON T HE OTHER HAND, STATED THAT THE C IRCULAR WAS SQUARELY APPLICABLE TO THE PRESENT APPEAL S OF THE REVENUE . 4 6. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES, WE FIND THAT PRIMA FACIE, THE TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN THESE APPEALS BY THE REVENUE IS BELOW RS. 10.00 LA KH S AND, THEREFORE, WE DEEM IT PROPER TO DISMISS THE APPEALS PARTICULARLY BECAUSE THE PENDING APPEAL I S COVERED BY CIRCULAR IN VIEW OF PARA 10 OF THE CIRCULAR. HOWEVER, WE MAY CLARIFY THAT IF ON RECEIPT OF THIS ORDER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER FINDS THAT T HE TAX EFFECT IS ABOVE RS.10 LAKH S OR IN ANY OTHER MANNER, THE C IRCULAR IS NOT APPLICABLE IN VIEW O F EXCEPTIONS CULLED OUT IN THE C IRCULAR, HE WILL BE AT LIBERTY TO FILE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FOR RECALLING OF THIS ORDER WHICH THE TRIBUNAL WILL CONSIDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. WE FURTHER FIND CONSIDERAB LE FORCE IN THE CONTENTION OF THE CIT/DR THAT THIS ORDER CANNOT BE CONSIDERED AS AN ACCEPTANCE BY THE REVENUE ON THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THESE APPEALS AND WILL NOT BE AN ESTOPPEL FOR THE REVENUE TO TAKE UP THE ISSUES, INVOLVED IN THESE APPEALS, BEFORE ITAT O N MERITS IF THE TAX EFFECT IN THOSE YEARS IS MORE THAN RS.10 LA KH S. 7. KEEPING IN VIEW THE ABOVE CIRCULAR AND THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 268A OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT, 1961 AND WITHOUT GOING INTO MERITS OF THE CASES, WE DISMISS THE INSTANT APPEAL S FILED BY TH E REVENUE AS TAX EFFECT IN ALL THE APPEAL S IS LESS THAN RS.10 LA KHS . 5 THE CROSS OBJECTION ALSO STANDS DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN. 8 . IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEAL S OF THE REVENUE AND CROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE STAND DISMISSED. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 1 . 0 3 .201 6 . S D / - S D / - ( J.S.REDDY ) ( LALIET KUMAR ) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 1 1 T H MARCH, 201 6 VL/ COPY FORWARDED TO: 1 . APPELLANT 2 . RESPONDENT 3 . CIT 4 . CIT(A) 5 . DR ASST. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI