ITO, CHENNAI V. Abdul Saleem, CHENNAI

MA 222/CHNY/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4463 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 22-06-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 10-06-2016
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 21-09-2015
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: T DILLI BABU
• Assessee Lawyers: B SAGADEVAN
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , ! , ' #$ BEFORE SHRI N.R.S.GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MA NO. 222/MDS/2015 (IN ITA NO. 433/MDS/2014) / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, NON-CORPORATE WARD-11(1), CHENNAI 600 006. ( /APPLICANT) VS MR. ABDUL SALEEM, PROP: SMART IMPEX, NEW NO.91 (OLD NO.43/1), RAMASWAMY STREET, CHENNAI 600 001. PAN AEFPA6301P ( /RESPONDENT) / APPLICANT BY : SHRI B. SAGADEVAN, JCIT / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI T. DILLIBABU, CA / DATE OF HEARING : 10.06.2016 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 22.06.2016 / O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BY THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION, THE ASSE SSEE SEEKS RECTIFICATION OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 433/MDS/2014 DATED 26.06.2016, WHEREIN THE TRIBUNAL DISMISSED TH E APPEAL OF - - MA 222/15 2 THE REVENUE, AS THE TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN 4 LAKHS BY PLACING RELIANCE ON THE CBDT INSTRUCTION NO.5/2014 DATED 10 .7.2014 AND THE ORDER OF THE KOLKATA BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN T HE CASE OF ITO VS. SUJIT PANDEY VIDE ORDER DATED 10.09.2014 IN ITA NO. 1914(KOL)/2012. 2. ACCORDING TO THE LD. DR, THE TRIBUNAL HAS NOT CO NSIDERED MADRAS HIGH COURT DECISION IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. M . SUSHIL KUMAR (TCA NOS. 805 & 806 OF 2015 DATED 29.6.2011 AND THE DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS . SUMAN DHAMIJA (SLP (C) NOS.18058-18059/2014) DATED 1.7.20 15, WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT BOARDS INSTRUCTION ON MON ETARY LIMIT WILL BE APPLICABLE TO THE CASES FILED AFTER THE ISSUANCE OF THE CIRCULAR ONLY. 3. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE RE IS NO MISTAKE ON RECORD SO AS TO RECALL THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES. IN OUR OPINION THAT THE TRIBUNAL AFTER CONSIDERING THE CBDT CIRCULAR CITED SUPRA, DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE HOLDING THAT TA X EFFECT INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IS LESS THAN 4,00,000/- AND THE - - MA 222/15 3 DEPARTMENT IS PRECLUDED FROM FILING THE APPEAL BEFO RE THE TRIBUNAL. NOW, THE REVENUE WANTS TO RECALL THE ORD ER OF THE TRIBUNAL STATING THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS NOT FOLLOWED THE JUDGMENTS CITED ABOVE. IN OUR OPINION, ONE MORE CIRCULAR IS ISSUED BEARING NO. 21/2015, DATED 10 TH DECEMBER, 2015, WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT IF THE TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN 10 LAKHS, THE DEPARTMENT IS PRECLUDED FROM FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNA L. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE CIRCULAR, IF WE RECALL THE ORDER OF THE T RIBUNAL, NO PURPOSE WILL SERVE . HENCE, IN OUR OPINION, THERE IS NO MERIT IN THE ARGUMENT OF THE LD. DR. ACCORDINGLY, THE MISC. APP LICATION IS DISMISSED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISC. APPLICATION IS DISMISSE D. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON WEDNESDAY, THE 22 ND OF JUNE, 2016 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . . . '# ) ( $%& ' ( ) ) N.R.S.GANESAN * )+,-./0-1223-04* 567 /JUDICIAL MEMBER 6789::2;.<-.<=>?@>0 $5 /CHENNAI, A6% /DATED, THE 22 ND JUNE, 2016. MPO* - - MA 222/15 4 6#BC DC /COPY TO: 1. /APPELLANT 2. /RESPONDENT 3. E) * /CIT(A) 4. E /CIT 5. CF' G /DR 6. 'HI /GF.