Appeal details
Counselvise Citation
[2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 129882 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
4 year(s) 4 month(s) 7 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Miscellaneous Application
Pronouncement Date
17-08-2023
Appeal Filed By
Department
Order Result
Allowed
Bench Allotted
DB
Next Hearing Date
10-08-2023
Assessment Year
2009-2010
Appeal Filed On
10-04-2019
Judgement Text
M.A. Nos.35, 36 & 37/RJT 2019 (In ITA Nos.249, 250 & 251/RJT/2015) A.Ys. 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT (Conducted through E-Court at Ahmedabad) BEFORE Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. Nos.35, 36 & 37/RJT/2019 (In ITA Nos.249, 250 & 251/RJT/2015) Assessment Years: 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 2(3), Porbandar Shri Tulsibhai P. Ladani, 301, Sampati Tower-III, B/h. Oddessey Tower, Kalawad Road, Rajkot [PAN – AARPL 1848 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Dushyant Maharshi, AR Revenue by Shri Abhimanyu Singh , Sr. DR Da te o f He a r in g 11.08.2023 Da te o f P ro n o u n ce m e n t 18.08.2023 O R D E R PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER : These Miscellaneous Applications are filed by the Revenue in respect of order dated 18.09.2018 passed by the Tribunal. 2. The Ld. DR submitted that the Tribunal has dismissed Revenue’s appeals on the ground of low tax effect but from the perusal of the assessment records, it appears that the assessments were reopened on the basis of information received from the CBI, Gandhi Nagar through REIC regarding misappropriation of funds amounting to Rs.5.24 crores by the assessee who incidentally was an employee of State Bank of India, Kutiyana. Therefore, in respect of CBDT Circular No.3 of 2018 dated 11.07.2018 wherein in paragraph no.10 it has been stated that the matters where the addition is based on information received from external sources in the M.A. Nos.35, 36 & 37/RJT 2019 (In ITA Nos.249, 250 & 251/RJT/2015) A.Ys. 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 2 nature of low enforcement agencies, the circular of low tax effect will not be applicable in such case and the mater may be contested on merit. 3. The Ld. AR submits that there is an information received from the CBDT, Gandhi Nagar in assessee’s case. 4. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. It appears that the exception given in paragraph no.10 of the CBDT letter no.F.No.279/Misc/142/2007-ITJ/(PT) dated 20.08.2018, the present appeals are not coming under the purview of low tax effect. Therefore, order dated 18.09.2018 passed in ITA Nos.249, 250 & 251/RJT/2015 is hereby recalled and the appeals are fixed for fresh hearing on 20.09.2023 on merit. The Registry is directed to place these appeals for hearing. Both the parties have been informed accordingly in the open court and, therefore, no notice is required. 5. In the result, all the three Miscellaneous Applications filed by the Revenue are allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on this 18 th August, 2023. Sd/- Sd/- (WASEEM AHMED) (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) Accountant Member Judicial Member Ahmedabad, the 18 th day of August, 2023 PBN/* Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order UE COPY Assistant Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Ahmedabad benches, Ahmedabad
AI Insights
The case involves the Income Tax Officer, Ward \\u2013 2(3), Porbandar as the appellant and Shri Tulsibhai P. Ladani as the respondent. The Revenue's appeals were initially dismissed by the Tribunal due to low tax effect. However, upon discovering that the assessments were reopened based on information from the CBI regarding significant misappropriation of funds by the assessee, the Revenue filed Miscellaneous Applications. The Tribunal acknowledged that the case did not qualify for dismissal under the low tax effect policy due to the serious nature of the allegations and the involvement of external enforcement agencies. Consequently, the Tribunal recalled its previous order and scheduled a new hearing.
