ITO, Tuticorin V. Shri P.Hariharan, Udangudi

MA 10/CHNY/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7733 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 23-03-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 19-01-2012
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N DEVANATHAN
• Assessee Lawyers: DR YOGESH KAMATH
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, CHENNAI BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER .. M.P. NOS. 9 & 10/MDS/2012 (IN I.T.A. NOS. 467 & 468/MDS/2010) ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2006-07 & 2007-08 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD I(1), TUTICORIN. (PETITIONER) V. SHRI P. HARIHARAN, 4/159, THISAYANVILAI ROAD, THERIYUR, UDANGUDI, TUTICORIN DISTRICT. PAN : ABEPH8487E (RESPONDENT) PETITIONER BY : SHRI N. DEVANATHAN RESPONDENT BY : DR. YOGESH KAMATH DATE OF HEARING : 23.03.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 23.03.2012 O R D E R PER ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : IN THESE MISCELLANEOUS PETITIONS, GRIEVANCE OF TH E REVENUE IS THAT THIS TRIBUNAL DISMISSED ITS APPEALS APPLYING C IRCULAR NO.3 OF 2011 DATED 9.2.2011 CITING LOW TAX EFFECT. AS PER THE REVENUE, THE SAID CIRCULAR CAN BE APPLIED ONLY FOR APPEAL FILED ON OR AFTER 9.2.2011 M.P. NOS. 9 & 10/MDS/12 2 AND PRIOR TO THAT DATE, THE EARLIER CIRCULAR, NAMEL Y, CIRCULAR NO.5 OF 2008 HAD TO BE APPLIED. 2. WE HAVE HEARD THE CONTENTIONS OF BOTH PARTIES. INSOFAR AS THE ISSUE OF LOW TAX EFFECT IS CONCERNED, THIS TRIBUNAL HAS BEEN TAKING CONSISTENT VIEW THAT CIRCULAR NO.3 OF 2011 DATED 9. 2.2011 WOULD APPLY TO THE APPEALS PENDING BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL ALSO. REASON WHY THIS CIRCULAR COULD BE APPLIED FOR PENDING APPEALS HAS A LREADY BEEN GIVEN BY THIS TRIBUNAL IN ITS DECISION DATED 2 ND DECEMBER, 2011 IN M.P. NO.197/MDS/2011, WHEREIN RELIANCE HAS BEEN PLACED O N THE DECISIONS OF HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V. S. SUMATHI (317 ITR 422), HONBLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V. ABHINASH GUPTA (327 ITR 61) AND THAT OF HON BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V. MADHUKAR K. INAMDA R (318 ITR 141). 3. NOW, LEARNED D.R. BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE THE DE CISION OF HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF M. SUSHIL KUMAR (SUPRA). IN THIS DECISION DATED 29.6.2011, IT HAS BEEN HELD BY HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT THAT THE TERMINOLOGY USED IN INSTRUCTION NO.1777 DATED 4.11.1987 AND INSTRUCTION NO.1903 DAT ED 28 TH OCTOBER, 1992 AND THE LATER CIRCULAR OF THE BOARD D ATED 27 TH MARCH, M.P. NOS. 9 & 10/MDS/12 3 2000 WOULD BE RELEVANT AS ON THE DATE OF FILING APP EAL OR IN OTHER WORDS, IT WOULD NOT APPLY TO MATTERS PENDING BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. 4. SINCE THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT HAS HELD THA T CIRCULAR ON TAX EFFECT WILL APPLY ONLY TO APPEALS FILED AFTER THE D ATE OF SUCH CIRCULARS, JUDICIAL DISCIPLINE REQUIRES US TO BOW BEFORE SUCH HIGHER WISDOM, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE JUDICIAL HIERARCHY. WE ARE THE REFORE CONVINCED THAT THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL SUFFERS FROM A MISTA KE APPARENT ON RECORD AND HAS TO BE RECALLED. IN THE RESULT, THE ORDER IN THE APPEAL IS RECALLED AND REGISTRY IS DIRECTED TO FIX IT FOR HEA RING ON 5 TH JUNE, 2012, AFTER GIVING DUE NOTICES TO THE PARTIES. 5. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITIONS FILED BY THE REVENUE ARE ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AFTER CONCLUSION OF HEARING ON 23 RD MARCH, 2012. SD/- SD/- (GEORGE MATHAN) (ABRAHAM P. GEORGE) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED THE 23 RD MARCH, 2012. KRI. M.P. NOS. 9 & 10/MDS/12 4 COPY TO: (1) PETITIONER (2) RESPONDENT (3) CIT(A) (4) CIT (5) D.R. (6) GUARD FILE