The ITO, Ward-5(3), Baroda V. M/s. New Ladla Jewellers, Baroda

ITSSA 498/AHD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 122 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1624 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 5 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-03-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 21-03-2016
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 05-10-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SONIA KUMAR
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Income from undisclosed sources; Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, A HMEDABAD , (BEFORE SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, A.M. & SHRI KUL BHARA T, J.M.) ( , !' # , ! $% ) IT(SS)A NO. 498/AHD/2012 [ASSESSMENT YEAR (BLOCK PERIOD): 01.04.90 TO 27.06. 2000] ITO, WARD 5(3) 5 TH FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, RACE COURSE CIRCLE, BARODA VS. M/S. NEW LADLA JEWELLERS, VITHAL MANDIR LANE, MANDVI, BARODA PAN NO. AABFN9703A (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SMT. SONIA KUMAR, SR. D.R. RESPONDENT BY : NONE DATE OF HEARING : 21 -03- 2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21 -03-2016 ( )/ ORDER PER ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS AGAINST THE ORD ER OF CIT(A)-V, BARODA, DATED 25.07.2012 FOR BLOCK PERIOD 01.04.90 TO 27.06 .2000. 2. THE GROUND RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN THE PRESENT APPEAL READS AS UNDER:- 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW (I) THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING THE PENALT Y OF RS. 5,06,650/-, IMPOSED U/S.158BFA(2) OF THE IT ACT ON THE ADDITIONS MADE O N ACCOUNT OF THE FOLLOWING INCOME ASSESSED AS UNACCOUNTED INCOME DERIVED BY TH E ASSESSEE: (A) RS.7,67,980/- ON A/C OF UNACCOUNTED INVESTMENT (B) RS.63,000/- ON A/C OF UNACCOUNTED CASH (C) RS.13,411/- ON A/C OF UNACCOUNTED EXPENSES IT(SS)A NO.498/AHD/12 (ITO VS. M/S. NEW LADLA JEW ELLERS) 2 (II) THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN: (A) GIVING WEIGHTAGE AT THIS STAGE TO ASSESSEES CL AIM ABOUT THE UNACCOUNTED STOCK OF GOLD JEWELLERY OF RS.7,67,980/- AS BELONGI NG TO ONE OF THE PARTNERS, SHRI DHANESH LADLA DUE TO IT BEING REFLECTED IN HIS RETURN OF INCOME FOR A.Y.1999-2000 ETC, WHEN SUCH CLAIM HAD ALREADY BEEN REJECTED CATEGORICALLY BY CIT(A)/ITAT AT QUANTUM ADDITION ST AGE; (B) IGNORING THAT THE ASSESSEE HIMSELF HAS ADMITTED THE CASH OF RS.63,000/- TO BE UNACCOUNTED; AND (C) IGNORING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT PRESSED UPON THE ADDITIONS OF RS.63,000/- AND RS.13,411/- MADE ON A/C OF UNACCOUN TED CASH AND UNACCOUNTED EXPENSES RESPECTIVELY IN THE QUANTUM AP PEAL FILED BEFORE THE CIT(A), WHICH IN ITSELF INDICATES THE ADMISSION BY THE ASSESSEE ON BOTH THE COUNTS. 2. WITHOUT PREJUDICE, LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW I N DELETING PENALTY U/S.158BFA(2) ON THE CRITERION OF BONAFIDE REASONS, OVERLOOKING ABSENC E OF SUCH CRITERION IN PROVISIONS OF SECTION 158BFA & ALSO IN OVERLOOKING DECISION BY GU JARAT HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF KANDOI BHOGILAL MULCHAND VS. DCIT [2012] 21 TAXMANN .COM 153(GUJ) AFFIRMING THAT PENALTY U/S158BFA WOULD ARISE IN CASES WHERE INCOME FOR BLOCK PERIOD ASSESSED BY THE A.O. IS IN EXCESS OF INCOME DECLARED IN THE RETURN FOR BLOCK PERIOD FILED BY ASSESSEE. 3. ON THE DATE OF HEARING, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE BUT HOWEVER THE LD. D.R. FAIRLY ADMITTED THAT THE TAX EFFECT ON THE IMPUGNED ADDITIONS IS LESS THAN THE LIMIT PRESCRIBED BY THE CBDT CIRCULAR OF 10.12.2015 BEARING NO. 21 OF 2015. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. D.R. AND PERUSED THE MATER IAL ON RECORD. ON PERUSING THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE REVENUE, WE FIN D THAT REVENUE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE DELETION OF PENALTY IMPOSED U/S.158BFA(2) OF TH E ACT AMOUNTING TO RS.5,06,650/-, THE TAX EFFECT OF WHICH IS BELOW RS. 10 LACS. AS PER THE ANNOUNCEMENT OF CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES (CBDT) DATED 10.12 .2015 (CIRCULAR NO. 21 OF 2015), NO DEPARTMENT APPEALS ARE TO BE FILED AGAINS T RELIEF GIVEN BY LD. CIT(A) BEFORE THE INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL UNLESS THE TAX EFFEC T, EXCLUDING INTEREST EXCEEDS RS. 10 LACS AND IT FURTHER STATES THAT THE INSTRUCTIONS WILL APPLY RETROSPECTIVELY TO THE PENDING APPEALS. IN THE PRESENT CASE, SINCE IT IS A N UNDISPUTED FACT THAT ON THE ADDITIONS WHICH ARE IN DISPUTE, THE TAX EFFECT IS L ESS THAN RS. 10 LACS AND IN THE IT(SS)A NO.498/AHD/12 (ITO VS. M/S. NEW LADLA JEW ELLERS) 3 ABSENCE OF ANY MATERIAL ON RECORD BY THE REVENUE TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THE ISSUE IN THE PRESENT APPEAL IS COVERED BY EXEMPTIONS SPECIFI ED IN CLAUSE (8) OF THE AFORESAID CBDT CIRCULAR, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE MONETARY LIMIT PRESCRIBED BY THE INSTRUCTIONS OF THE AFORESAID CBDT CIRCULAR WOULD B E APPLICABLE TO THE PRESENT APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT AND THEREFORE THE PRESENT APPEAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE ON ACCOUNT OF LOW TAX EFFECT. IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES, W E DISMISS THE APPEAL OF REVENUE WITHOUT EXPRESSING ANY OPINION ON MERITS OF THE CAS E. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF REVENUE IS DISMISSE D. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 21 - 03 - 2016. SD/- SD/- (KUL BHARAT) (ANIL CHATURVEDI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD: DATED 21/03/2016 TRUE COPY S K SINHA COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT (APPEALS) 4. THE CIT CONCERNED. 5. THE DR., ITAT, AHMEDABAD. 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER DEPUTY/ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT, AHMEDABAD