The ACIT, Central Circle-1(4), Ahmedabad V. Shri Vinodkumar Harjivandas Patel, Ahmedabad

ITSSA 72/AHD/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1136 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 7 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-09-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 20-07-2017
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 03-02-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: LALIT P JAIN
• Assessee Lawyers: T P HEMANI
• Keywords: Audit objection; Tax effect
• Section: 54B

Judgement Text

ITSSA NO.72/AHD/2014 ACIT VS. VINODKUMAR HARJIVANDAS PATEL ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12 PAGE 1 OF 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD D BENCH, AHMEDABAD [CORAM: PRAMOD KUMAR, AM AND MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JM] IT(SS)A NO.72/AHD/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12 ACIT ..................APPELLANT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4), AHMEDABAD VS. VINODKUMAR HARJIVANDAS PATEL ............................RESPONDENT 44/342, GOVT. H. COLONY, KALAPINAGAR, ASARWA, AHMEDABAD-380 016 [PAN : APZPP 8039 A] APPEARANCES BY: LALIT P. JAIN, FOR THE APPELLANT TP HEMANI, FOR THE RESPONDENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : 05.09.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : 06.09.2018 O R D E R PER PRAMOD KUMAR, AM: 1. BY WAY OF THIS APPEAL, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS CHALLENGED CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 13.11.2013, PASSED BY THE LEARNED C IT(A)-I, AHMEDABAD FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12, ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: (1) THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS I N ADMITTING FRESH EVIDENCES WITH REGARD TO THE ISSUE OF DISALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTI ON U/S 54B OF THE ACT WITHOUT GIVING THE AO AN OPPORTUNITY TO OFFER HIS C OMMENTS ON THE SAME IN CONTRAVENTION OF RULE 46A OF THE I.T. RULES. (2) THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DIRECTING THE AO TO ALLOW DEDUCTION OF RS.35,73,217/- U/S 54B OF THE ACT BRUS HING ASIDE VARIOUS EVIDENCES AVAILABLE ON RECORD TO SHOW THAT THE LAND PURCHASED WAS NOT USED FOR AGRICULTURAL PURPOSES. (3) THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.35,00,000/- MADE U/S 68 OF THE ACT, AS THE ASSES SEE HAS FAILED TO SUBMIT THE DETAILS AND EVIDENCES TO PROVE CREDITWORTHINESS AND CAPACITY OF THE LENDERS. (4) IT IS, THEREFORE, PRAYED THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A) BE SET ASIDE AND THAT OF THE A.O. BE RESTORED TO THE ABOVE EXTENT. ITSSA NO.72/AHD/2014 ACIT VS. VINODKUMAR HARJIVANDAS PATEL ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12 PAGE 2 OF 2 2. AT THE OUTSET, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE PRESENT APPEAL OF THE REVENUE NEEDS TO BE DISMISSED ON ACCO UNT OF LOW TAX EFFECT IN VIEW OF THE RECENT CBDT CIRCULAR NO.3 OF 2018 DATED 11.07.2 018. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FAIRLY ADMITTED THAT TH E TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IS LESS THAN THE LIMIT PRESCRIBED BY THE AFORESAID CBDT CIRCULAR. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT PRIMA-FACIE THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS NOT MAINTAINABLE IN VIEW OF THE RECENT CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 3/2018 IN F.NO .279/MISC. 142/2007-ITJ (PT) DATED 11 TH JULY, 2018, VIDE WHICH IT HAS BEEN DECIDED BY THE BOARD THAT NO DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS SHOULD BE FILED BEFORE THE TRI BUNAL IF THE TAX EFFECT BY VIRTUE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)S ORDER IS BELOW RS. 20 LACS. THE BOARD HAS PROVIDED EXEMPTIONS AT CLAUSE (10) OF THE INSTR UCTIONS WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN PROVIDED THAT THESE INSTRUCTIONS WILL NOT BE APPLIC ABLE, WHERE THE CONSTITUTIONAL VALIDITY OF THE PROVISIONS OF AN ACT/RULE IS UNDER CHALLENGE OR WHERE BOARDS ORDER, NOTIFICATION, INSTRUCTION OR CIRCULAR HAS BEEN HELD TO BE ILLEGAL OR WHERE REVENUE AUDIT OBJECTION IN THE CASE HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE DEPA RTMENT OR WHERE THE ADDITION RELATES TO UNDISCLOSED FOREIGN ASSETS/BANK ACCOUNTS ETC. WE FIND THAT THE PRESENT CASE DOES NOT FALL WITHIN THE EXEMPTION CLAUSE AND THE TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN RS.20 LACS. THEREFORE, THE PRESENT APPEAL IS NOT MAINTA INABLE AND HENCE DISMISSED. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISM ISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT TODAY ON THE 6 TH SEPTEMBER, 2018 SD/- SD/- MS. MADHUMITA ROY PRA MOD KUMAR (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AHMEDABAD, THE 6 TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2018 **BT COPIES TO: (1) THE APPELLANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) COMMISSIONER (4) CIT(A) (5) DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER TRUE COPY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCHES, AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION: ................COVERED MATT ER..05.09.2018.... 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE T HE DICTATING MEMBER: .. 05.09.2018..... 3. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR . P.S./P.S.: 06.09.2018... 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE TH E DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT: .. 06.09.2018. 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK : . 06.09.2018. 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK : . 7. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER : . 8. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER: ......