The Assistant Commr. of Income Tax, Gandhidham Circle, GANDHIDHAM V. M/s Symbolic Fabtex Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

MA 3/RJT/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4942 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 22-03-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 28-02-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: RANJIT LALCHANDANI
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

Page 1 of 3 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद ᭠यायपीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT (CONDUCTED THROUGH E-COURT AT AHMEDABAD) BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A No.03/Rjt/2019 in अपील सं./ITA No.208/Rjt/2016 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ/Asstt. Year: 2010-2011 D.C.I.T., Gandhidham Circle, Gandhidham. Vs. M/s. Symbolic Fabtex Pvt. Ltd., 99/101, Agrawal House, Cavel Street, Ramwadi, Kalbadevi Road, Mumbai-2 PAN: AADCA1432CJ (Applicant) (Respondent) Revenue by : Shri S.S. Rathi, Sr. D.R Assessee by : Shri Ranjit Lalchandani, A.R सुनवाई कᳱ तारीख/Date of Hearing : 14/03/2022 घोषणा कᳱ तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 23/03/2022 आदेश/O R D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The Revenue by way of this Miscellaneous Application is seeking to recall the consolidated order passed by the ITAT in ITA No. 208/Rjt/2016 vide order dated 30/11/2018 on the reasoning there is a mistake apparent from the record. 3. The Revenue in the Miscellaneous Application submitted that the main appeal was dismissed by the ITAT on the reasoning that the amount of tax involved in the dispute does not exceed Rs.20 lacs and therefore the appeal filed by the Revenue ITA no.03/Rjt/2019 Asstt. Year 2010-11 Page 2 of 3 is not maintainable. However, the case of the assessee was falling under the exception provided in para 10 of Circular no. 3/18 dated 11/07/2018 wherein the limit as provided in the circular for the disputed amount of tax was not applicable. In other words, the case of the Revenue has to be contested on merit irrespective of the amount disputed in the appeal filed by the Revenue. 4. In view of the above, the Ld. DR submitted that the relief granted by the Tribunal for the amount of tax of Rs. 16,46,090/- has to be contested on merit and therefore the order passed by the ITAT should be recalled as there is a mistake apparent from the record. 5. On the contrary, the Ld. AR, before us fairly admitted that the reopening was initiated based on the information received from the Sales Tax Department which was challenged before the Ld. CIT(A). But the Ld. CIT(A), has decided the same against the assessee. However, the Ld. CIT(A), has not confirmed the addition on merit as made by the AO. 5.1 According to the Ld. AR, the issue of challenging the validity of the reopening has reached its finality as the same was not challenged by the assessee before the Tribunal. As such, the issue was challenged by the Revenue is this that the addition made by the AO on merit was deleted by the Ld.CIT(A). Therefore, what is to be seen is the issue which was raised by the Revenue before the ITAT, as much as the issue of challenging the validity of the assessment order was never raised by the Revenue. The Ld. AR vehemently supported the order of the ITAT. 6. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the materials available on record. As per the CBDT Circular no. 3 of 18 dated 11/07/2018, the appeal filed by the Revenue was not maintainable if it involves a tax effect which is less than Rs.20 lacs as applicable to the relevant time. However, the criteria for the monetary limit was subject to the certain exception provided in para 10 of the Circular which reads as under: ITA no.03/Rjt/2019 Asstt. Year 2010-11 Page 3 of 3 The details in respect of the above mentioned case as per the para 10 of Circular No.03/2018 dated 11.07.2018 (as amended by F.No.279/Misc.142/2007-ITJ (Pt) dated 28.08.2018) is ************************************************************************ Where addition is based on information received from external sources in the nature of law enforcement agencies such as CBI/ED/DRI/SFIO/Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI) or, 7.1 In the case on hand there is no ambiguity to the fact that there was the information received from VAT Department based on which the proceedings are initiated. This fact can also be verified from the order of the AO which reads as under: The case was re-opened on the basis of information received from Maharashtra VAT department about alleged bogus/inflated purchased made by the assessee from ‘Biller’ Victor Intertrade Pvt. Ltd. having TIN: 27250665279V and PAN AACCV7591E. 7.2 From the above, there remains no ambiguity that the case of the assessee falls under the exception. Therefore, the same has to be decided on merit. Accordingly, the Miscellaneous Application filed by the Revenue is allowed with the direction to the registry to restore the appeal to its original number and fix for a fresh hearing in due course of time under intimation to both the parties. 8. In the result, the Miscellaneous Application filed by the Revenue is allowed. Order pronounced in the Court on 23/03/2022 at Ahmedabad. Sd/- Sd/- (MAHAVIR PRASAD) (WASEEM AHMED) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (True Copy) Ahmedabad; Dated 23/03/2022 Manish