ACIT, New Delhi V. M/s Smart Trust Infosolutions (P) Ltd, New Delhi

MA 488/DEL/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7192 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 07-10-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 27-09-2010
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MRS ANUSHA KHURANA
• Assessee Lawyers: VARUN KHANNA
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH `FRIDAY E: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI C.L.SETHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.N. PAHUJA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A.NO.488/DEL/2010 (IN I.T.A. NO.4172/DEL/2009) ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, M/S. SMART TRUST IN FO SOLUTION CIRCLE 9(1), NEW DELHI. VS. PVT. LTD., W-129, GROU ND FLOOR GREATER KAILASH-II, NEW DELHI. PAN: AAICS3801J (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY : MRS. ANUS HA KHURANA, SR. DR. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI VARUN KHANNA, CA. O R D E R PER C.L. SETHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER THE REVENUE HAS FILED THIS MISC. APPLICATION BY POI NTING OUT THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN THE PRESENT APPEAL WAS OF RS.2,00,956 /-, WHICH WAS ABOVE THE MANDATORY LIMIT OF RS.2,00,000/- THEN PRESCRIBED BY THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES FOR FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBU NAL. IT HAS ALSO BEEN POINTED OUT THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS DISMISSED REVENUE S APPEAL ON THE GROUND THAT THE TAX EFFECT IS BELOW RS.2,00,000/-, WHICH I S NOT CORRECT. 2 2. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE M ATERIAL ON RECORD. 3. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS ADMITTE D BEFORE US THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN THE PRESENT CASE IS OF RS.2,00,956/-, WHICH IS MORE THAN RS.2,00,000/-. CONSEQUENTLY, OUR ORDER DATED 18.03 .2010 STATING THAT TAX EFFECT IN THE APPEAL IS BELOW RS.2 LAKH, IS CERTAIN LY A MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD RECTIFIABLE UNDER SEC. 254(2) OF THE ACT. S INCE THE TAX EFFECT IN THE PRESENT APPEAL WAS MORE THAN RS.2 LAKH, THIS APPEAL SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN DISMISSED ON THE GROUND THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN THE PRESENT CASE WAS LESS THAN RS.2 LAKH. WE, THEREFORE, RECALL OUR ORDER DATED 1 8.03.2010 AND RESTORE THIS APPEAL TO ITS FILE FOR FRESH DECISION. AT THIS STA GE, IT HAS BEEN POINTED OUT BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT THE TAX E FFECT HAS NOW BEEN RAISED TO RS.3 LAKH AND THEREFORE, THIS APPEAL IS OTHER WISE NOT MAINTAINABLE. HOWEVER, THAT ASPECT OF THE MATTER MAY BE DECIDED I N THE COURSE OF FRESH HEARING OF THIS APPEAL, WHICH HAS BEEN RECALLED BY THIS ORDER. WE, THEREFORE, DIRECT THE REGISTRY TO FIX THIS APPEAL FOR FRESH HE ARING IN DUE COURSE OF TIME. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE MISC. APPLICATION FILED BY TH E REVENUE IS ALLOWED. 5. THIS DECISION WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT I MMEDIATELY AFTER THE HEARING WAS OVER ON 7 TH OCTOBER, 2011. SD/- SD/- (A.N. PAHUJA) (C.L. SETHI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 7 TH OCTOBER, 2011. 3 MA NO.488/DEL/2010 (IN ITA NO.4172/DEL/2009) COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. APPLICANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR BY ORDER *MG DEPUTY REGISTRAR, ITAT.