ACIT, Circle-46(1), V. Sanjay Bansal,

MA 195/DEL/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6582 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 17-06-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2000-2001
• Appeal Filed On: 11-05-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SRUJANI MOHANTY
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : FRIDAY : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI I.P. BANSAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.D. RANJAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A NO. 195/DEL/2010 (ITA NO.2317/DEL/04) ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2000-01 ACIT, CIRCLE 46(1), NEW DELHI. VS. SHRI SANJAY BANSAL, M-148, GREATER KAILASH-II, NEW DELHI. (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY : SMT. SRUJANI MOHANTY, DR RESPONDENT BY : NONE O R D E R PER I.P. BANSAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER: VIDE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED AS ABOVE, THE RE VENUE HAS SOUGHT RECALL OF ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 24 TH SEPTEMBER, 2009 PASSED IN ITA NO.2317/DEL/2004. THE APPEAL FILED B Y THE REVENUE WAS DISMISSED ON ACCOUNT OF LOW TAX EFFECT. IT HAS BEEN RE CORDED IN PARA 3 OF THE SAID ORDER THAT LD. DR OF THE REVENUE HAD CON CEDED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL THAT THE TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN THE SAID AP PEAL WAS LESS THAN ` 2 LAC. IT MAY BE MENTIONED HERE THAT EARLIER ALSO TH E REVENUE HAD FILED SIMILAR APPLICATION WHICH WAS DISPOSED OF VIDE ORDER DA TED 7 TH AUGUST, 209 IN MA NO.77/DEL/2009 WHEREIN CONSIDERING THE SUBM ISSION OF THE DEPARTMENT THE CASE WAS RECALLED AND THE MATTER WAS FI XED FOR HEARING ON 24 TH SEPTEMBER, 2009. ON 24 TH SEPTEMBER, 2009, IT IS RECORDED IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL THAT DR HAD CONCEDED THAT TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN THE INSTANT APPEAL IS LESS THAN ` 2 LAC. HOWEVER, A GAIN, THE REVENUE MA NO.195/DEL/2010 2 HAS FILED THE AFOREMENTIONED MISC. APPLICATION VIDE W HICH IT HAS BEEN CONTENDED THAT APPEAL OF THE REVENUE HAS WRONGLY BEE N DISMISSED AS THE TAX EFFECT IS MORE THAN ` 2 LAC. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, LD. DR POINTED OUT THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN THE PRESENT APPEAL IS ` 2,18,000/-, BUT, SHE COULD NOT SUBMIT ANY DETAILS THAT HOW THAT TAX EFFECT HAS BEEN WORKED OUT. THE CALCULATION OF TAX EFFECT HAS BEEN FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEES COUNSEL ON OUR RECORD WHICH READ AS UNDER:- TOTAL INCOME ASSESSED = ` 29,81,520/- TAX ON TOTAL INCOME ASSESSED = ` 8,68,456/- DISPUTED ISSUES = ` 6,31,876/- TAX ON DIFFERENCE IN INCOME I.E., ` 23,49,344/- = ` 6,78,802/- DIFFERENCE = ` 8,68,456/- - ` 6,78,802 TAX EFFECT = ` 1,89,654 ======= 3. THEREFORE, THERE IS NOTHING ON RECORD TO PROVE TH AT TAX EFFECT IN ANY CASE WAS MORE THAN ` 2 LAC. 4. MOREOVER, RECENTLY, HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASES: (I) CIT VS. M/S P.S. JAIN & CO. IN ITA NO.179/1991, ORDER DAT ED 2 ND AUGUST, 2010; AND (II) CIT VS. DELHI RACE CLUB IN ITA NO.128 /2008 , ORDER DATED 3 RD MARCH, 2011, HAS HELD THAT NEW MONETARY LIMIT WHICH IS FIXED FOR FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL OF ` 3 LAC WI LL BE APPLICABLE TO ALL PENDING CASES. IF THE SAID DECISION OF HONBLE DELHI H IGH COURT IS TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION, THEN ALSO THE PRESENT APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED. THEREFORE, EVEN IF WE PRESUME THAT TAX EFFECT IS MORE THAN ` 2 LAC, BUT LESS THAN ` 3 LAC, THEN, NO USEFUL PURPOSE MA NO.195/DEL/2010 3 WOULD BE SERVED BY RECALLING THE AFOREMENTIONED CASE. THEREFORE, WE FIND NO SUBSTANCE IN THE MISC. APPLICATION FILED BY TH E REVENUE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. . THE ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 17.06.20 11. SD/- SD/- [K.D. RANJAN] [I.P. BANSAL] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED, 17.06.2011. DK COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, DEPUTY REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHES MA NO.195/DEL/2010 4