ITO, CHENNAI V. Vadachennaiyil Vazhum Thrichendur Srivakundam Sathankulam Taluka Nadargal Aikiya Sangam, CHENNAI

MA 155/CHNY/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3576 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 11-11-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 16-10-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 04-09-2015
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A B KOLI
• Assessee Lawyers: D ANAND
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, CHENNAI , . ! '# , $ %& BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER (IN ITA NO. 3120 /MDS/2014) / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS), WARD-2, CHENNAI 600 034. PETITIONER) V. M/S. VADACHENNAIYIL VAZHUM THIRUCHENDUR SRIVAIKUNDAM SANTHAKULAM TALUKA NADARGAL AIKIYA SANGAM, NO.45, T.H.ROAD, CHENNAI 19. PAN AAATV2217J RESPONDENT) PETITIONER BY : SHRI A.B.KOLI, JCIT RESPONDENT BY : SHRI D. ANAND, ADVOCATE ! '#$ / DATE OF HEARING : 16.10.2015 %& ! '#$ / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 11 .11.2015 ' / O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BY THIS MISC. PETITION, THE REVENUE SEEKS RECALL OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO.3120/MDS/2014 DATED 6.4.2015. - - MA 155/15 2 2. THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT THE TRIBUNAL DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE PLACING RELIANCE ON THE CBDT INSTRUCTION NO. 5/2014 DATED 10.7.2014 AND OBSERVING THAT TAX E FFECT INVOLVED IN THIS CASE IS BELOW ` 4 LAKHS. ACCORDING TO THE LD. DR, THE TAX EFFECT TO BE ` 4,32,934/- WHICH COMPRISES THE FOLLOWING: TAX ` 3,82,113/- SURCHARGE ` 38,211/- EDUCATION CESS ` 12,610/- TOTAL ` 4,32,934/- THEREFORE, THE LD. DR MADE A PRAYER THAT THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL MAY BE RECALLED AND THE APPEAL MAY BE HEAR D ON MERIT. 3. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE INSTRUCTION OF THE CBDT WAS ISSUED ON 10.7.2014 AND AS PER THIS INSTRUCTION, TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN ` 4 LAKHS IN THIS APPEAL, WHICH IS NOT MAINTAINABLE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. ACCORDING TO HIM, IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE APPEAL WAS FILED ON 29.12.2014 AN D THE ABOVE CIRCULAR IS SQUARELY APPLICABLE. FURTHER, THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE TRIBUNAL IS JUSTIFIED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE AS TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN THIS CASE IS LESS THAN ` 4 LAKHS. 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE M ATERIAL ON RECORD. THE ARGUMENT OF THE LD. DR IS TOTALLY M ISCONCEIVED. THE DEFINITION OF TAX U/S.2(43) OF THE I.T. ACT IS AS FOLLOWS : - - MA 155/15 3 SEC.2(43) : TAX IN RELATION TO THE ASSESSMENT YE AR COMMENCING ON THE 1 ST DAY OF APRIL 1965, AND ANY SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEAR MEANS INCOME-TAX CHARGEABLE UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ACT, AND IN RELATION TO ANY OTHER ASSESSMENT YEAR INCOME-TAX AN D SUPER-TAX CHARGEABLE UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THIS A CT PRIOR TO THE AFORESAID DATE [AND IN RELATION TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR COMMENCING ON THE 1 ST DAY OF APRIL, 2006, AND ANY SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEAR INCLUDES THE FRINGE BENEFIT TAX PAYABLE UNDER SECTION 115WA] BEING SO, THE COMPONENT LIKE SURCHARGE AND EDUCATIO N CESS CANNOT BE CONSIDERED AS TAX COMPONENT AND ONLY TAX TO BE CONSIDERED. IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE TAX IS ONLY ` 3,82,113/-, WHICH IS BELOW THE THRESHOLD OF ` 4 LAKHS FOR FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. ACCORDINGLY, WE ARE OF THE OP INION THAT THE APPEAL IS DEVOID OF MERIT AND THE SAME IS DISMISSED . 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISC. PETITION IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON WEDNESDAY, THE 11 TH OF NOV., 2015 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . ( ) ) ( *+, - . /# ) 012345657 895:35;53<7 = (> /JUDICIAL MEMBER ?@$ (>ABB2:C5:CDEFD3 *@= /CHENNAI, G(+ /DATED, THE 11 TH NOV., 2015. MPO* - - MA 155/15 4 H(@I !'J?K-LM@K' /COPY TO: 1. L-? /APPELLANT 2. /RESPONDENT 3. H H N'L-?7 /CIT(A) 4. H H N' /CIT 5. KO)'P /DR 6. )QR? /GF.