ITO WD 11(10(2), V. KULDEEP SINGH NANDA,

MA 415/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0347 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 19-04-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 25-06-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DIPAK KUMAR SINHA
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

1 MA NO. 415/MUM/ 2012 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES A BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, AM AND SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, J M MA NO. 415/MUM/2012 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 6357/MUM/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 INCOME TAX OFFICER- 11(1)(2), R. NO. 436A, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K. ROAD, MUMBAI 400 020. VS. KULDEEP SINGH NANDA, 16, VASANT , PEDDAR ROAD, MUMBAI 400 026. PAN AABPN 3364 K APPLICANT RESPONDENT APPLICANT BY SHRI DIPAK KUMAR SI NHA RESPONDENT BY SHRI MANDAR VAIDYA DATE OF HEARING : 19-04 -2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 19-04-2013 ORDER PER P.M. JAGTAP, A.M. BY THIS MISC. APPLICATION, THE REVENUE IS SEEKING RECALL OF THE TRIBUNALS ORDER DTD. 22-12-2011 PASSED IN ITA NO. 6357/MUM/20 10 FOR A.Y. 2005-06 DISMISSING THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE TREATING THE SAME AS NOT MAINTAINABLE ON THE GROUND THAT THE TAX EFFECT INVO LVED THEREIN WAS LESS THAN THE MONETARY LIMIT FIXED IN THE CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 3 DTD. 9-1-2011 FOR FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 2 MA NO. 415/MUM/ 2012 2. WE HAVE HEARD THE ARGUMENTS OF BOTH THE SIDES AN D ALSO PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. AS SUBMITTED IN THE PRESENT MISC. APPLICATION FILED BY THE REVENUE AND FURTHER REITER ATED BY THE LD. D.R. AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE US, THE HONBLE SUPREME COUR T HAS CONSIDERED A SIMILAR ISSUE IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. VIRGO MARKETING PVT. L TD. (SLP NO. 21705 OF 2011 DATED 6-01-2012) WHEREIN THE HONBLE APEX COURT HAS TAKEN NOTE OF PARA 11 OF THE BOARDS INSTRUCTION NO. 3 DTD. 9-1-2011 WHICH C LEARLY STATES THE NEW MONETARY LIMITS WILL APPLY ONLY PROSPECTIVELY. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE APPEAL IN THE PRESENT CASE HAVING BEEN FILED BY THE REVENUE O N 26-08-2010, THE MONETARY LIMIT PRESCRIBED IN THE BOARDS INSTRUCTIO N DTD. 9-1-2011 IS NOT APPLICABLE AND THERE IS A MISTAKE IN THE ORDER OF T HE TRIBUNAL DTD. 22-12-2011 (SUPRA) IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE BY APPLYING THE SAID INSTRUCTION WHICH CAN BE RECTIFIED BY RECALLING THE SAID ORDER. A PERUSAL OF THE ORDER OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT PASSED IN THE CA SE OF M/S VIRGO MARKETING PVT. LTD. (SUPRA) HOWEVER SHOWS THAT THERE IS NO DE CISION RENDERED ON THIS ISSUE AND ONLY A LIBERTY IS GRANTED TO THE DEPARTMENT TO MOVE THE HONBLE HIGH COURT BY WAY OF REVIEW PETITION IN VIEW OF PARA 11 OF THE CBDT INSTRUCTION DTD. 9-2- 2011. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE TRIBUNAL WHILE DISMISS ING THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE VIDE ITS ORDER DTD. 22-12-2011 (SUPRA) HAVE RELIED ON THE DECISION OF HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF MADHUKAR K . INAMDAR (318 ITR 149 (BOM) WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT THE CBDT INSTRUCTION NO. 3 DTD. 9-1-2011 IS APPLICABLE EVEN TO THE PENDING APPEAL. WE THEREFOR E FIND NO MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DTD. 22-12 -2011 (SUPRA) AS ALLEGED BY 3 MA NO. 415/MUM/ 2012 THE REVENUE IN THE PRESENT MISC. APPLICATION AND DI SMISS THE SAID MISC. APPLICATION BEING DEVOID OF MERIT. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE MISC. APPLICATION FILED BY TH E REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 19-04-2013. SD/- SD/- (AMIT SHUKLA) (P.M. JAGTAP) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED 19-04-2013. RK COPY TO 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) CONCERNED - MUMBAI 4. THE CIT- CONCERNED, MUMBAI 5. THE DR BENCH, A 6. MASTER FILE // TUE COPY// BY ORDER DY/ASSTT. REGISTRAR ITAT, MUMBAI