ACIT, CHENNAI V. M/s. MCS Investments P. Ltd., CHENNAI

MA 151/CHNY/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9286 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 02-11-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 07-09-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Audit objection; Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, CHENNAI BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P.GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.P. NO.151/MDS/2012 (IN ITA NO.1015/MDS/2011) (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2001-02) ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COMPANY CIRCLE IV(1) CHENNAI-600 034. VS. M/S. MCS INVESTMENTS P.LTD., 20/1, BAHIRATHI AMMAL STREET, T.NAGAR, CHENNAI-600 017. PAN : AABCM1207F (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY : MR. SHAJI P.JACOB, ADDL. CIT RESPONDENT BY : NONE DATE OF HEARING : 2 ND NOVEMBER, 2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 2 ND NOVEMBER, 2012 O R D E R PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM : THE REVENUE HAS FILED PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS PETITIO N FOR RECALLING ORDER DATED 21 ST MARCH, 2012 PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL. 2. THE REVENUE HAD FILED AN APPEAL IMPUGNING THE OR DER OF THE CIT(A) DATED 7.2.2011 RELEVANT TO THE ASSESS MENT YEAR 2001-02 WHEREBY THE CIT(A) HAD DELETED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO THE TUNE OF ` 4,64,813/-. THE TRIBUNAL VIDE EARLIER ORDER HAD DISMISSED THE APPE AL OF THE M.P.NO. 151/MD S/2012 2 REVENUE ON ACCOUNT OF LOW TAX EFFECT. AT THE TIME OF DISPOSAL OF THE APPEAL, THE DR HAD CONCEDED THAT TAX EFFECT IN THE APPEAL IS LESS THAN THE MONETARY LIMIT AS PRESCRIBE D IN THE CBDT INSTRUCTION NO.3/11 DATED 9.2.2011. 3. THE REVENUE HAS FILED THE PRESENT MISC.PETITION STATING THAT THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS REOPENED ON ACCOU NT OF AUDIT OBJECTION. THE DEPARTMENT HAD ACCEPTED THE AU DIT OBJECTION, THEREFORE, THE QUESTION OF TAX EFFECT FO R FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL BASED ON MONETARY LIMIT DOES NOT ARISE IN VIEW OF CLAUSE (C) OF PARA 8 OF THE CBDT I NSTRUCTION. 4. A PERUSAL OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL AS WELL AS TH E ORDERS PASSED BY THE LOWER AUTHORITIES DO NOT REVEAL THAT THE ASSESSMENT WAS REOPENED ON ACCOUNT OF AUDIT OBJECTI ON OR THAT THE DEPARTMENT HAD ACCEPTED THE AUDIT OBJECTIO NS. EVEN ALONG WITH THE MISC.PETITION THE REVENUE HAS NOT FI LED ANY DOCUMENT TO SHOW THAT THE ASSESSMENT WAS REOPENED O N ACCOUNT OF AUDIT OBJECTION AND THE DEPARTMENT HAD A CCEPTED THE SAME. THE APPEAL WAS DISMISSED AFTER THE LEARNE D DR HAD CONCEDED THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN THE APPEAL INVO LVED WAS M.P.NO. 151/MD S/2012 3 LESS THAN THE MONETARY LIMIT PRESCRIBED BY THE CBDT . WE DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN THE PRESENT APPLICATION. THER EFORE, THE SAME IS DISMISSED BEING DEVOID OF MERIT. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ON FRIDAY, THE 2 ND DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2012 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ABRAHAM P.GEORGE) ( VIKAS AWASTHY ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED THE 2 ND NOVEMBER, 2012. SOMU COPY TO: (1) APPELLANT (4) CIT( A) (2) RESPONDENT (5) D.R. (3) CIT (6) G.F.