INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4-2, JAIPUR V. M/S NATANI ROLLING MILLS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

MA 51/JPR/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6875 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 10-09-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 26-05-2020
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ROONIPAL
• Keywords: Period of limitation; Question of law; Tax effect
• Section: 43B; 10AA; 201; 254(2); 13; 148; 54

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHE S, JAIPUR JH FOT; IKY JKO] U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH FOE FLAG ;KNO] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM M.A. NOS. 50 & 51/JP/2020 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 537 & 538/JP/2018) FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2010-11 & 2011-12 INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2), JAIPUR CUKE VS. M/S NATANI ROLLING MILLS PVT. LTD. F-694, ROAD NO. 9-F-2, VKI AREA, JAIPUR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: AAACN5961E VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ L S@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI P. C. PARWAL (CA) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS @ REVENUE BY : SMT. ROONI PAL (JCIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF HEARING : 21/08/2020 MN?KKS'K.KK DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 10/09/2020 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M. THESE ARE TWO MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS FILED BY T HE REVENUE U/S 254(2) OF THE ACT AGAINST THE CONSOLIDATED ORDE R PASSED BY THIS BENCH IN ITA NO. 537 & 538/JP/2018 DATED 02.09.2019 . 2. AT THE OUTSET, IT IS NOTED THAT THERE IS A DELAY IN FILING THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS BY 55 DAYS AS PRESCRIBED U/S 254(2) OF THE ACT. 3. IN THIS REGARD, THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 254(2) OF THE ACT, NO DOUBT, THE DUE DATE O F FILING THE PRESENT M.A. NO. 50 & 51/JP/2020 M/S NATANI ROLLING MILLS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR VS. ITO, JAIPUR 2 MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION WAS ON 31.03.2020. HOWEVE R, DUE TO COVID- 19 PANDEMIC SITUATION AND NATIONWIDE LOCK DOWN, THE DEPARTMENT WAS NOT ABLE TO FILE THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS APPLICAT ION AS SO SPECIFIED U/S 254(2) OF THE ACT. AT THE SAME TIME, IT WAS SUBMITT ED THAT THE MINISTRY OF FINANCE HAD ISSUED A PRESS RELEASE DATED 24.03.2 020 AS PER WHICH DUE DATE FOR FILING OF APPEAL WAS EXTENDED UP TO 30 .06.2020. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT VIDE GAZETTE NOTIFICATION IS SUED BY THE MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA VIDE DATED 31. 03.2020, THE DUE DATE FOR FILING OF APPEALS AND APPLICATIONS UNDER P ROVISIONS OF THE SPECIFIED ACT, WHICH INCLUDES APPLICATION U/S 254(2 ) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, HAS BEEN EXTENDED UP TO 30.06.2020 AND THE CON TENTS THEREOF READS AS UNDER: 3(1) WHERE, ANY TIME LIMIT HAS BEEN SPECIFIED IN, OR PRESCRIBED OR NOTIFIED UNDER, THE SPECIFIED ACT WHICH FALLS DURIN G THE PERIOD FROM THE 20 TH DAY OF MARCH, 2020 TO THE 29 TH DAY OF JUNE, 2020 OR SUCH OTHER DAY AFTER THE 29 TH DAY OF JUNE, 2020 AS THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT MAY, B Y NOTIFICATION, SPECIFIED IN THIS BEHALF, FOR THE COM PLETION OR COMPLIANCE OF SUCH ACTION AS- (A) COMPLETION OF ANY PROCEEDING OR PASSING OF ANY ORDE R OR ISSUANCE OF ANY NOTICE, INTIMATION, NOTIFICATION, S ANCTION OR APPROVAL OR SUCH OTHER ACTION, BY WHATEVER NAME CALLED, BY A NY AUTHORITY, COMMISSION OR TRIBUNAL, BY WHATEVER NAME CALLED, UN DER THE PROVISIONS OF THE SPECIFIED ACT; OR (B) FILING OF ANY APPEAL, REPLY OR APPLICATION OR FURNI SHING OF ANY REPORT, DOCUMENT RETURN, STATEMENT OR SUCH OTHER RE CORD, BY WHATEVER NAME CALLED, UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE S PECIFIED ACT; OR (C) IN CASE WHERE THE SPECIFIED ACT IS THE INCOME-T AX ACT, 1961,- M.A. NO. 50 & 51/JP/2020 M/S NATANI ROLLING MILLS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR VS. ITO, JAIPUR 3 (I) MAKING OF INVESTMENT, DEPOSIT, PAYMENT, ACQUISITI ON, PURCHASE, CONSTRUCTION OR SUCH OTHER ACTION, BY WHATEVER NAME CALLED, FOR THE PURPOSES OF CLAIMING ANY DEDUCTION, EXEMPTION OR AL LOWANCE UNDER THE PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN- (I) SECTION 54 TO 54GB OR UNDER ANY PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER VI-A UNDER THE HEADING B.-DEDUCTIONS IN RE SPECT OF CERTAIN PAYMENTS' THEREOF; OR (II) SUCH OTHER PROVISIONS OF THAT ACT, SUBJECT T O FULFILLMENT OF SUCH CONDITIONS, AS THE CENTRAL GOVE RNMENT MAY, BY NOTIFICATION, SPECIFY; OR (II) BEGINNING OF MANUFACTURE OR PRODUCTION OF ARTI CLES OR THINGS OR PROVIDING ANY SERVICES REFERRED TO IN SEC TION 10AA OF THAT ACT, IN A CASE WHERE THE LETTER OF APPROVAL , REQUIRED TO BE ISSUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF T HE SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONES ACT, 2005, HAS BEEN ISSUED O N OR BEFORE THE 31 ST DAY OF MARCH, 2020, AND WHERE COMPLETION OR COMPLIANCE OF SUCH ACTION H AS NOT BEEN MADE WITHIN SUCH TIME, THEN, THE TIME LIMIT FO R COMPLETION OR COMPLIANCE OF SUCH ACTION SHALL, NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING CONTAINED IN THE SPECIFIED ACT, STAND EXTENDED TO THE 30 TH DAY OF JUNE, 2020, OR SUCH OTHER DATE AFTER THE 30 TH DAY OF JUNE, 2020, AS THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT MAY, BY NOTIFICATION, SPECIFY IN THIS BEHALF: PROVIDED THAT THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT MAY SPECIFY DIFFERENT DATES FOR COMPLETION OR COMPLIANCE OF DIFFERENT ACTIONS. M.A. NO. 50 & 51/JP/2020 M/S NATANI ROLLING MILLS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR VS. ITO, JAIPUR 4 PROVIDED FURTHER THAT SUCH ACTION SHALL NOT INC LUDE PAYMENT OF ANY AMOUNT AS IS REFERRED TO IN SUB-SECTION (2). (2) WHERE ANY DUE DATE HAS BEEN SPECIFIED IN, OR PRESCRIBED OR NOTIFIED UNDER, THE SPECIFIED ACT FOR PAYMENT OF AN Y AMOUNT TOWARDS TAX OR LEVY, BY WHATEVER NAME CALLED, WHICH FALLS D URING THE PERIOD FROM THE 20 TH DAY OF MARCH, 2020 TO THE 29 TH DAY OF JUNE, 2020 OR SUCH OTHER DATE AFTER THE 29 TH DAY OF JUNE, 2020 AS THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT MAY, BY NOTIFICATION, SPECIFY IN THIS BE HALF, AND SUCH AMOUNT HAS NOT BEEN PAID WITHIN SUCH DATE, BUT HAS BEEN PAID ON OR BEFORE THE 30 TH DAY OF JUNE, 2020, OR SUCH OTHER DATE AFTER THE 30 TH DAY OF JUNE, 2020 AS THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT MAY, BY NOTIFICATION, SPECIFY IN THIS BEHALF, THEN, NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTH ING CONTAINED IN THE SPECIFIED ACT,- (A) THE RATE OF INTEREST PAYABLE, IF ANY, IN RESPEC T OF SUCH AMOUNT FOR THE PERIOD OF DELAY SHALL NOT EXCEED THR EE-FOURTH PERCENT, FOR EVERY MONTH OR PART THEREOF; (B) NO PENALTY SHALL BE LEVIED AND NO PROSECUTION S HALL BE SANCTIONED IN RESPECT OF SUCH AMOUNT FOR THE PERIOD OF DELAY. EXPLANATION- FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SUB-SECTION, THE PERIOD OF DELAY MEANS THE PERIOD BETWEEN THE DUE DATE AND TH E DATE ON WHICH THE AMOUNT HAS BEEN PAID. 4. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED BY THE LD DR THAT THE H ONBLE SUPREME COURT HAD ALSO TAKEN SUO MOTU COGNIZANCE OF THE COV ID 19 PANDEMIC AND WHILE DISPOSING OFF SUO MOTU WRIT PETITION (CIV IL) NO. 3/2020 DATED 23.03.2020, HAS HELD AS UNDER:- M.A. NO. 50 & 51/JP/2020 M/S NATANI ROLLING MILLS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR VS. ITO, JAIPUR 5 THIS COURT HAS TAKEN SUO MOTU COGNIZANCE OF THE SI TUATION ARISING OUT OF THE CHALLENGE FACED BY THE COUNTRY ON ACCOUNT OF COVID-19 VIRUS AND RESULTED DIFFICULTIES THAT MAY BE FACED BY LITIGANT S ACROSS THE COUNTRY IN FILING THEIR PETITIONS/APPLICATIONS/SUITS/APPEALS/A LL OTHER PROCEEDINGS WITHIN THE PERIOD OF LIMITATION PRESCRIBED UNDER TH E GENERAL LAW OF LIMITATION OR UNDER SPECIAL LAWS (BOTH CENTRAL AND/ OR STATE) TO OBVIATE SUCH DIFFICULTIES AND TO ENSURE THAT LA WYERS/LITIGANTS DO NOT HAVE TO COME PHYSICALLY TO FILE SUCH PROCEEDING S IN RESPECTIVE COURTS/TRIBUNALS ACROSS THE COUNTRY INCLUDING THIS COURT, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT A PERIOD OF LIMITATION IN ALL SUCH PRO CEEDINGS, IRRESPECTIVE OF THE LIMITATION PRESCRIBED UNDER THE GENERAL LAW OR SPECIAL LAWS WHETHER CONDONABLE OR NOT SHALL STAND EXTENDED W.E. F 15 TH MARCH 2020 TILL FURTHER ORDER/S TO BE PASSED BY THIS COURT IN PRESENT PROCEEDINGS. WE ARE EXERCISING THIS POWER UNDER ARTICLE 142 REA D WITH ARTICLE 141 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AND DECLARE THAT T HIS ORDER IS A BINDING ORDER WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 141 ON ALL COUR TS/TRIBUNALS AND AUTHORITIES. THIS ORDER MAY BE BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF ALL HIG H COURTS FOR BEING COMMUNICATED TO ALL SUBORDINATE COURTS/TRIBUN ALS WITHIN THEIR RESPECTIVE JURISDICTION. 5. IT WAS ACCORDINGLY SUBMITTED BY THE LD DR THAT T HE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS SO FILED BY THE REVENUE U/S 254(2) IS WELL WITHIN EXTENDED DUE DATE AND THE SAME MAY BE ADMITTED FOR ADJUDICAT ION. 6. PER CONTRA, THE LD. AR FAIRLY SUBMITTED THAT IN TERMS OF NOTIFICATION ISSUED BY MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE, GOVT. OF INDIA DATED 31.03.2020, THE DUE DATE FOR FILING OF APPEALS AS W ELL AS MISC. APPLICATIONS HAVE BEEN EXTENDED UP TO 30 TH JUNE, 2020. IT WAS FURTHER M.A. NO. 50 & 51/JP/2020 M/S NATANI ROLLING MILLS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR VS. ITO, JAIPUR 6 SUBMITTED THAT THE DUE DATE HAS BEEN FURTHER EXTEND ED UP TO 31 ST DECEMBER, 2020. IT WAS ACCORDINGLY SUBMITTED THAT I N VIEW OF ABOVE RELAXATION WHEREBY THE DUE DATE HAS BEEN EXTENDED, THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT HAVE ANY OBJECTION WHERE THE MISCELLANEOUS APPL ICATIONS SO FILED BY THE REVENUE ARE ADMITTED AS FILED WITHIN SPECIFIED DUE DATE AS EXTENDED. 7. HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PURUSED THE MATERIA L AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE RESPECTFULLY NOTE THAT THE HONBLE SUPRE ME IN AFORESAID SUO- MOTO MATTER HAS LAID DOWN THAT PERIOD OF LIMITATION IN ALL SUCH PROCEEDINGS, IRRESPECTIVE OF THE LIMITATION PRESCRI BED UNDER THE GENERAL LAW OR SPECIAL LAWS WHETHER CONDONABLE OR NOT SHALL STAND EXTENDED W.E.F 15 TH MARCH 2020 TILL FURTHER ORDER/S TO BE PASSED BY TH IS COURT IN PRESENT PROCEEDINGS. THEREAFTER, MINISTRY OF LAW AN D JUSTICE, GOVT. OF INDIA HAS ALSO ISSUED A NOTIFICATION DATED 31.03.20 20 WHEREIN THE DUE DATES WHICH FALLS DURING THE PERIOD 20.03.2020 TO 2 9.06.2020 HAS SINCE BEEN EXTENDED TO 30 TH JUNE, 2020 IN RESPECT OF APPEALS AND APPLICATIONS UNDER THE SPECIFIED ACT WHICH INCLUDES THE INCOME T AX ACT. IN THE PRESENT CASE, DUE DATE BEING 31 ST MARCH, 2020 FOR FILING THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS U/S 254(2) AND THE FACT THAT THESE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS HAVE BEEN FILED WITH THE REGISTRY ON 26.05.2020, FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE S UPREME COURT AND THE TAXATION AND OTHER LAWS (RELAXATION OF CERTAIN PROVISIONS) ORDINANCE, 2020 AS NOTIFIED IN THE GAZETTE OF INDIA DATED 31 ST MARCH, 2020, THE SAME ARE HEREBY ADMITTED AS FILED WITHIN THE EXTENDED DUE DATE IN TERMS OF SECTION 254(2) OF THE ACT. 8. NOW COMING TO THE SUBJECT MATTER OF THE MISCELLA NEOUS PETITIONS SO FILED BY THE REVENUE FOR A.Y 2010-11 AND A.Y 201 1-12. M.A. NO. 50 & 51/JP/2020 M/S NATANI ROLLING MILLS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR VS. ITO, JAIPUR 7 MA NO. 50/JP/2020 9. WITH THE CONSENT OF BOTH THE PARTIES, WE TAKE TH E MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO. 50/JP/2020 ARISING OUT OF 537/JP/2018 FOR A.Y 2010-11 AS THE LEAD CASE FOR THE PURPOSES OF PRESENT DISCUSSIO NS. 10. IN THIS REGARD, THE LD DR SUBMITTED THAT THE RE VENUES APPEAL WAS DISMISSED ON ACCOUNT OF LOW TAX EFFECT, HOWEVER , THE CASE FALLS UNDER EXCEPTION 10(E) OF CBDT CIRCULAR DATED 11.07. 2018 AND ACCORDINGLY, GROUNDS NO. 1 AND 2 OF THE REVENUES A PPEAL ARE TO BE DECIDED ON MERITS. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT G ROUND NO. 3, 4 & 5 HAVE ALSO NOT BEEN ADJUDICATED ON MERITS AS THE APP EAL OF THE REVENUE WAS DISMISSED ON ACCOUNT OF LOW TAX EFFECT. IT WAS ACCORDINGLY SUBMITTED THAT THE ORDER SO PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL MAY KINDLY BE RECALLED AND THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE BE HEARD ON MERITS. IN THIS REGARD, OUR REFERENCE WAS DRAWN TO THE CONTENTS OF THE MISC. PETITION SO FILED BY THE REVENUE WHICH READ AS UNDER: THE HON'BLE ITAT VIDE ITS ORDER IN ITA NO. 537/ JP /2018 HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE ON THE BASIS OF CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 3/2018, REPLACED BY CIRCULAR NO. 17/2019 DATED 8 TH AUGUST 2019 WHEREIN THE MONETARY LIMIT FOR FILING APPEAL BEFORE THE HON'BLE ITAT HAS BEEN ENHANCED/FIXED AT RS. 50 LACS. THE HON'BLE ITAT HELD THAT THE MONETARY LIMIT IN THIS CASE IS LESS THAN 50 LAC S, AND HENCE, DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE WITHOUT GOING I N TO THE MERITS ON THE QUESTION OF LAW. HOWEVER, IT HAS BEEN OBSERVED THAT THE CASE FALLS UNDER EXCEPTION LAID DOWN BY THE CBDT AS PER AMENDM ENT TO THE PARA 10(E) OF THE CIRCULAR NO. 3/2018 DATED 11.07.2 018, MADE VIDE F.NO.- 279/MISC.142/2007-ITJ(PT) DATED 20 TH AUGUST 2018 AS THE INFORMATION IN THIS CASE WAS PASSED ON BY THE EXTER NAL SOURCE I.E. DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF GST INTELLIGENCE(DGGI), HENC E, THE APPEAL OF M.A. NO. 50 & 51/JP/2020 M/S NATANI ROLLING MILLS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR VS. ITO, JAIPUR 8 THE REVENUE SHOULD HAVE BEEN DECIDED ON MERITS WHIC H HAS NOT BEEN DONE BY THE HON'BLE ITAT. THEREFORE, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS REQUIRED TO BE DECIDED ON MERIT. THOUGH, THE HON'BLE ITAT HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL O F THE REVENUE ON THE BASIS OF TAX EFFECT HELD AS LESS THA N 50 LACS, HOWEVER, THE HON'BLE ITAT VIDE ITS JUDGMENT IN CROS S OBJECTION 29/JP/2018 ARISING OUT OF THE APPEAL NO. 537/JP/201 8 FOR THE A.Y. 2010-11 OF THE REVENUE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE HAS DE CIDED THE CASE ON MERITS ON FOLLOWING ISSUES. 1. THE LD CIT(A) HAS ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN A DOPTING THE AMOUNT OF UNRECORDED SALES AT RS. 1,42,40,278/-(RS. 1,27,14,534/- NET OF EXCISE) ON THE BASIS OF THE PA PERS FOUND IN SEARCH CONDUCTED BY THE CENTRAL EXCISE DEPARTMENT A S AGAINST THE UNACCOUNTED SALES OF RS. 92,89,856/- (RS. 82,94 ,514/- NET OF EXCISE) WORKED OUT BY THE ASSESSEE ON THE BASIS OF THESE PAPERS. 2. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS FURTHER ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN APPLYING THE G.P. RATE OF 3.61% ON THE ALLEGED UNRE CORDED SALES OF RS. 1,42,40,278/- INSTEAD OF APPLYING G.P RATE O F 3.43% DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE ON THE UNACCOUNTED SALES O F RS. 92,89,856/- (RS. 82,94,514/-NET OF EXCISE), THEREBY CONFIRMING THE ADDITION TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 5,14,074/-. ON PERUSAL OF THE ABOVE ORDER OF THE HON'BLE ITAT, IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE HON'BLE ITAT HAS DECIDED THE ISSU E MENTIONED IN GROUND NO. 1 & 2 OF THE REVENUE APPEAL WHILE DEC IDING THE CROSS OBJECTION NO. 29/JP/2018 FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. HOW EVER, THE FOLLOWING ISSUES MENTIONED AT SR. NO. 3-5 HAVE NOT BEEN CONSIDERED ON MERITS WHILE MAKING JUDGMENT ON THE SAID CROSS O BJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE:- 3. WHETHER IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION O F RS. 14,21,343/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE OF INTE REST EXPENSES AGAINST INTEREST FREE LOANS GIVEN WITHOUT APPRECIATING M.A. NO. 50 & 51/JP/2020 M/S NATANI ROLLING MILLS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR VS. ITO, JAIPUR 9 THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN LOANS FOR BUSI NESS PURPOSES & CLAIMED INTEREST AS EXPENSES WHEREAS IT HAS GIVEN INTEREST FREE LOANS & ADVANCES TO THE SISTER CONCER N & OTHER PARTIES. 4. WHETHER IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 42 ,688/- MADE FOR DEPOSITING THE EMPLOYEES CONTRIBUTION TO PF & ESI B EYOND THE PRESCRIBED TIME LIMIT PROVIDED IN THE RESPECTIVE AC TS. 5. WHETHER IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW LD. CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN HOLDING THAT THE EMPLOYEES CONTRIBUTION TO PF & ESI ARE GOVERNED BY THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 43B AND NOT BY SECTION 36(1)(VA) R.W.S. 2(24)(X) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. FROM THE ABOVE, IT IS APPARENT FROM RECORD THAT THE HON'BLE ITAT HAS NOT CONSIDERED THE FACT THAT THE CASE OF T HE ASSESSEE FALLS IN EXCEPTION LAID DOWN BY THE CBDT AS PER AMENDMENT TO THE PARA 10(E) OF THE CIRCULAR NO. 3/2018 DATED 11.07.2018, MADE V IDE F.NO.- 279/MISC.142/2007-ITJ(PT) DATED 20 TH AUGUST 2018 AS THE INFORMATION IN THIS CASE WAS PASSED ON BY THE EXTERNAL SOURCE I .E. DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF GST INTELLIGENCE(DGGI) AND ALSO NOT DECI DED THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL OF THE REVENUE MENTIONED AT SR. NO. 3-5 O N MERIT. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, IT IS REQUESTED THAT THE HON'BLE ITAT MA Y TAKE COGNIZANCE OF THIS FACT AND PASS NECESSARY ORDER IN THIS REGAR D. 11. PER CONTRA, LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT AS FAR AS GRO UND NOS. 1 AND 2 OF THE REVENUES APPEAL ARE CONCERNED, THE SAME HAV E ALREADY BEEN DECIDED ON MERITS BY THE TRIBUNAL WHILE DISPOSING O FF THE ASSESSEES CROSS OBJECTIONS NO. 29/JP/2018 DATED 02/09/2019. I T WAS ACCORDINGLY SUBMITTED THAT GIVEN THAT THE MATTER HAS ALREADY BE EN DECIDED BY THE TRIBUNAL ON MERITS AND THEREFORE, THEY CANNOT BE A DIFFERENT FINDING WHICH CAN BE RECORDED BY THE TRIBUNAL WHILE DISPOSI NG OFF THE REVENUES APPEAL ON THE SAME SET OF FACTS, THEREFOR E, NO USEFUL PURPOSE WOULD BE SERVED IN RECALLING THE REVENUES APPEAL E VEN WHERE THE CASE M.A. NO. 50 & 51/JP/2020 M/S NATANI ROLLING MILLS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR VS. ITO, JAIPUR 10 OF THE REVENUE FALLS UNDER EXCEPTION AS CONTAINED I N PARA 10(E) OF THE CBDT CIRCULAR. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE E XCEPTION SO CONTAINED IN PARA 10(E) OF THE CBDT CIRCULAR RELATE S TO AND LIMITED TO ISSUES CONTAINED IN GROUND NOS. 1 AND 2 OF THE REVE NUES APPEAL, THEREFORE, WHERE THE TRIBUNAL FINALLY DECIDE TO REC ALL ITS ORDER, THE SAME SHOULD BE LIMITED TO RECALLING THE ORDER SO FAR AS IT RELATES TO ISSUES CONTAINED IN GROUND NO. 1 AND 2 OF THE REVENUES AP PEAL AND THEREFORE AS FAR AS THE OTHER THREE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE CON CERNED WHICH WERE ALSO DISMISSED ON ACCOUNT OF LOW TAX EFFECT, GIVEN THAT THE SAME DOESNT FALL IN ANY OF THE EXCEPTIONS, THE ORDER OF THE TRI BUNAL TO THAT EXTENT SHOULD NOT BE RECALLED AS THE SAME CONTINUES TO THE GOVERNED BY THE LOW TAX EFFECT CIRCULAR ISSUED BY THE CBDT. 12. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT THE GROUND NO. 1 AND 2 OF THE REVENUES APPEAL RELATES TO ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNRECORDED SALES BASED ON INFORMATION/PAPERS FOUND IN SEARCH CONDUCT ED BY THE ANTI- EVASION BRANCH, CENTRAL EXCISE AUTHORITIES, JAIPUR I AS WELL AS SALES TAX AUTHORITIES AND SHARED IN THE REGIONAL ECONOMIC INT ELLIGENCE COUNCIL, RAJASTHAN AND BASIS THE SAME, THE ASSESSMENT WAS RE OPENED AND NOTICE WAS ISSUED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S 148 OF THE ACT. THEREFORE, WE AGREE WITH THE CONTENTION OF THE LD DR THAT THES E TWO GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE COVERED BY EXCEPTION 10(E) OF THE CIRCUL AR NO. 3/2018 AS AMENDED BY CBDT LETTER DATED 20.08.2018 AS THE ADDI TION WAS BASED ON INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM EXTERNAL COURSE I.E, D IRECTORATE GENERAL OF GST INTELLIGENCE AND ARE THEREFORE TO BE DECIDED ON MERITS. REGARDING THE CONTENTION OF THE LD A/R THAT THE SAID ISSUES H AVE ALREADY BEEN DEALT WITH IN ASSESSEES CROSS-OBJECTIONS ON MERITS AND THERE CANNOT BE M.A. NO. 50 & 51/JP/2020 M/S NATANI ROLLING MILLS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR VS. ITO, JAIPUR 11 A DIFFERENT FINDING WHICH CAN BE RECORDED BY THE TR IBUNAL WHILE DISPOSING OFF THE REVENUES APPEAL ON THE SAME SET OF FACTS, AT THIS STAGE, THE ISSUE IS LIMITED TO GROUNDS OF REVENUES APPEAL WHETHER COVERED BY EXCEPTION OR NOT AND THEREFORE, ONCE THE REVENUES APPEAL IS TAKEN UP FOR ADJUDICATION AND THE MATTER IS HEAR D, THE ASSESSEE WILL AT LIBERTY TO RAISE THE SAME. FURTHER, WE FIND THAT T HE LD CIT(A) HAS RESTRICTED THE ADDITION FROM RS 1,42,40,278/- TO RS 17,00,568/- AND THE ASSESSEES CROSS OBJECTION I S LIMITED TO ADDITION SUSTAINED BY THE LD CIT(A). THEREFORE, EVEN WHERE IT IS ASSUMED THAT THE MATTER HAS BEEN DECIDED ON MERITS IN ASSESSEES CROSS OBJECTION, THE REVENUES APPEAL STILL NEED TO BE HEARD ON MERI TS. WE THEREFORE FIND THAT AS FAR AS THE REVENUES APPEAL RELATING T O THESE TWO GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE CONCERNED, THE SAME ARE CLEARLY COVER ED UNDER THE EXCEPTION 10(E) OF THE CBDT CIRCULAR AND NEED TO BE DECIDED ON MERITS AND TO THAT EXTENT, THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNA L DESERVE TO BE RECALLED. 13. NOW, COMING TO OTHER THREE GROUNDS OF APPEALS IN THE REVENUES APPEAL WHICH WERE ALSO DISMISSED AS PART OF WHOLE O F THE REVENUES APPEAL BEING DISMISSED ON ACCOUNT OF LOW TAX EFFECT , AND NOT DECIDED ON MERITS AND IN RESPECT OF WHICH, IT HAS BEEN CONTEND ED BY THE LD DR THAT THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL SHOULD BE RECALLED AND TH E SAID GROUNDS OF APPEAL SHOULD BE DECIDED ON MERITS. 14. ADMITTEDLY, THESE THREE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE N OT COVERED UNDER ANY OF THE EXCEPTIONS SO CONTAINED IN THE CBDT CIRC ULAR AND INDIVIDUALLY, THE TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN RESPECT OF EACH OF THESE GROUND OF APPEALS IS LESS THAN THE PRESCRIBED THRESHOLD. THE QUESTION THAT NOW M.A. NO. 50 & 51/JP/2020 M/S NATANI ROLLING MILLS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR VS. ITO, JAIPUR 12 ARISES FOR CONSIDERATION IS WHETHER THE WHOLE OF TH E REVENUES APPEAL SHOULD BE DECIDED ON MERIT AND THE ORDER OF THE TRI BUNAL SHOULD THEREFORE BE RECALLED IN TOTALITY FOR ADJUDICATING ALL THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL INCLUDING THESE THREE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. AL TERNATIVELY, GIVEN THAT THE TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN RESPECT OF THESE TH REE GROUNDS OF APPEAL IS LESS THAN THE PRESCRIBED THRESHOLD AND OTHER TWO GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE COVERED BY EXCEPTION AS STATED IN PARA 10(E), T HE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL SHOULD BE RECALLED TO A LIMITED EXTENT FOR ADJUDICATING FIRST TWO GROUNDS OF APPEAL ONLY BEING COVERED BY EXCEPTION. FOR DECIDING THE SAME, MEANING OF THE TERM TAX EFFECT AS SO DEFINE D IN THE CBDT CIRCULAR NEEDS TO BE EXAMINED. 15. IN THIS REGARD, WE REFER TO CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 3 /2018 DATED 11.07.2018 WHERE THE TERM TAX EFFECT HAS BEEN DEF INED AND RELEVANT CONTENTS OF THE CIRCULAR READ AS UNDER: 3. HENCEFORTH, APPEALS/SLPS SHALL NOT BE FILED IN CASES WHERE THE TAX EFFECT DOES NOT EXCEED THE MONETARY LIMITS GIVEN HE REUNDER: S. NO. APPEALS/SLPS IN INCOME-TAX MATTERS MONETARY LIMIT (RS.) 1 BEFORE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 20,00,000 2 BEFORE HIGH COURT 50,00,000 3 BEFORE SUPREME COURT 1,00,00,000 IT IS CLARIFIED THAT AN APPEAL SHOULD NOT BE FILED MERELY BECAUSE THE TAX EFFECT IN A CASE EXCEEDS THE MONETARY LIMITS PRESCR IBED ABOVE. FILING OF APPEAL IN SUCH CASES IS TO BE DECIDED ON MERITS OF THE CASE. 4. FOR THIS PURPOSE, TAX EFFECT' MEANS THE DIFFERE NCE BETWEEN THE TAX ON THE TOTAL INCOME ASSESSED AND THE TAX THAT WOULD HAVE B EEN M.A. NO. 50 & 51/JP/2020 M/S NATANI ROLLING MILLS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR VS. ITO, JAIPUR 13 CHARGEABLE HAD SUCH TOTAL INCOME BEEN REDUCED BY TH E AMOUNT OF INCOME IN RESPECT OF THE ISSUES AGAINST WHICH APPEAL IS IN TENDED TO BE FILED (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS 'DISPUTED ISSUES). FUR THER, 'TAX EFFECT' SHALL BE TAX INCLUDING APPLICABLE SURCHARGE AND CESS. HOWEVE R, THE TAX WILL NOT INCLUDE ANY INTEREST THEREON, EXCEPT WHERE CHARGEAB ILITY OF INTEREST ITSELF IS IN DISPUTE. IN CASE THE CHARGEABILITY OF INTERES T IS THE ISSUE UNDER DISPUTE, THE AMOUNT OF INTEREST SHALL BE THE TAX EF FECT. IN CASES WHERE RETURNED LOSS IS REDUCED OR ASSESSED AS INCOME, THE TAX EFFECT WOULD INCLUDE NOTIONAL TAX ON DISPUTED ADDITIONS. IN CASE OF PENALTY ORDERS, THE TAX EFFECT WILL MEAN QUANTUM OF PENALTY DELETED OR REDUCED IN THE ORDER TO BE APPEALED AGAINST. 5. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL CALCULATE THE TAX EF FECT SEPARATELY FOR EVERY ASSESSMENT YEAR IN RESPECT OF THE DISPUTED IS SUES IN THE CASE OF EVERY ASSESSEE. IF, IN THE CASE OF AN ASSESSEE, THE DISPUTED ISSUES ARISE IN MORE THAN ONE ASSESSMENT YEAR, APPEAL CAN BE FIL ED IN RESPECT OF SUCH ASSESSMENT YEAR OR YEARS IN WHICH THE TAX EFFE CT IN RESPECT OF THE DISPUTED ISSUES EXCEEDS THE MONETARY LIMIT SPECIFIE D IN PARA 3. NO APPEAL SHALL BE FILED IN RESPECT OF AN ASSESSMENT Y EAR OR YEARS IN WHICH THE TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN THE MONETARY LIMIT SPEC IFIED IN PARA 3. IN OTHER WORDS, HENCEFORTH, APPEALS CAN BE FILED ONLY WITH R EFERENCE TO THE TAX EFFECT IN THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR. HOWEVER, IN CASE OF A COMPOSITE ORDER OF ANY HIGH COURT OR APPELLATE AUTHORITY, WHI CH INVOLVES MORE THAN ONE ASSESSMENT YEAR AND COMMON ISSUES IN MORE THAN ONE ASSESSMENT YEAR, APPEALS SHALL BE FILED IN RESPECT OF ALL SUCH ASSESSMENT YEARS EVEN IF THE TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN THE PRESCRIBED MONET ARY LIMITS IN ANY OF THE YEAR(S), IF IT IS DECIDED TO FILE APPEAL IN RESPECT OF THE YEAR(S) IN WHICH TAX EFFECT EXCEEDS THE MONETARY LIMIT PRESCRIBED. I N CASE WHERE A M.A. NO. 50 & 51/JP/2020 M/S NATANI ROLLING MILLS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR VS. ITO, JAIPUR 14 COMPOSITE ORDER/JUDGEMENT INVOLVES MORE THAN ONE AS SESSEE, EACH ASSESSEE SHALL BE DEALT WITH SEPARATELY. 16. THEREAFTER, CBDT VIDE CIRCULAR NO. 17/2019 DATE D 08.08.2019 HAS ENHANCED THE MONETARY LIMITS FOR FILING THE APPEALS AND THE RELEVANT CONTENTS THEREOF READ AS UNDER: 2. AS A STEP TOWARDS FURTHER MANAGEMENT OF LITIG ATION, IT HAS BEEN DECIDED BY THE BOARD THAT MONETARY LIMITS FOR FILING OF APPEALS IN INCOME-TAX CASES BE ENHANCED FURTHER THROUGH AME NDMENT IN PARA 3 OF THE CIRCULAR MENTIONED ABOVE AND ACCORDIN GLY, THE TABLE FOR MONETARY LIMITS SPECIFIED IN PARA 3 OF THE CIRC ULAR SHALL READ AS FOLLOWS: S. NO. APPEALS/SLPS IN INCOME-TAX MATTERS MONETARY LIMIT (RS.) 1 BEFORE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 50,00,000 2 BEFORE HIGH COURT 1,00,00,000 3 BEFORE SUPREME COURT 2,00,00,000 3. FURTHER, WITH A VIEW TO PROVIDE PARITY IN FILING OF APPEALS IN SCENARIOS WHERE SEPARATE ORDER IS PASSED BY HIGHER APPELLATE AUTHORITIES FOR EACH ASSESSMENT YEAR VIS--VIS WHERE COMPOSITE ORDER FOR MORE THAN ONE ASSESSMENT YEARS IS PASSED, PARA 5 OF THE CIRCULAR IS SUBSTITUTED BY THE FOLLOWING PARA: 5. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL CALCULATE THE TAX EFFECT SEPARATELY FOR EVERY ASSESSMENT YEAR IN RESPECT OF THE DISPUTED ISSUES IN THE CASE OF EVERY ASSESSEE. IF, IN THE CASE OF AN ASSESSEE, THE DISPUTED ISSUES ARISE IN MORE THAN ON E ASSESSMENT M.A. NO. 50 & 51/JP/2020 M/S NATANI ROLLING MILLS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR VS. ITO, JAIPUR 15 YEAR, APPEAL CAN BE FILED IN RESPECT OF SUCH ASSESS MENT YEAR OR YEARS IN WHICH THE TAX EFFECT IN RESPECT OF THE DIS PUTED ISSUES EXCEEDS THE MONETARY LIMIT SPECIFIED IN PARA 3. NO APPEAL SHALL BE FILED IN RESPECT OF AN ASSESSMENT YEAR OR YEARS IN WHICH THE TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN THE MONETARY LIMIT SPECIFIE D IN PARA 3. FURTHER, EVEN IN THE CASE OF COMPOSITE ORDER OF ANY HIGH COURT OR APPELLATE AUTHORITY WHICH INVOLVES MORE THAN ONE ASSESSMENT YEAR AND COMMON ISSUES IN MORE THAN ONE ASSESSMENT YEAR, NO APPEAL SHALL BE FILED IN RESPEC T OF AN ASSESSMENT YEARS OR YEARS IN WHICH THE TAX EFFECT I S LESS THAN THE MONETARY LIMIT SPECIFIED IN PARA 3. IN CASE WHE RE A COMPOSITE ORDER/ JUDGEMENT INVOLVES MORE THAN ONE A SSESSEE, EACH ASSESSEE SHALL BE DEALT WITH SEPARATELY. 17. WE THEREFORE FIND THAT THE TERM TAX EFFECT' HA S BEEN DEFINED TO MEAN THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TAX ON THE TOTAL INCOME ASSESSED AND THE TAX THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN CHARGEABLE HAD SUCH TO TAL INCOME BEEN REDUCED BY THE AMOUNT OF INCOME IN RESPECT OF THE I SSUES AGAINST WHICH APPEAL IS INTENDED TO BE FILED. THE ASSESSING OFFI CER SHALL CALCULATE THE TAX EFFECT SEPARATELY FOR EVERY ASSESSMENT YEAR IN RESPECT OF THE DISPUTED ISSUES IN THE CASE OF EVERY ASSESSEE. IN C ASES WHERE RETURNED LOSS IS REDUCED OR ASSESSED AS INCOME, THE TAX EFFE CT WOULD INCLUDE NOTIONAL TAX ON DISPUTED ADDITIONS. THE TAX EFFECT IS THEREFORE REQUIRED TO BE DETERMINED QUA THE DISPUTED ISSUES AND NOT QUA THE WHOLE OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR. THE REVENUE IS FIRSTLY REQUIRED TO IDENTIFY THE ISSUES AND THE DEC ISION OF THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY WHICH ARE NOT ACCEPTABLE TO IT AND ONCE T HE ISSUES ARE IDENTIFIED, IS REQUIRED TO DETERMINE THE TAX EFFECT IN RESPECT OF EACH OF SUCH DISPUTED M.A. NO. 50 & 51/JP/2020 M/S NATANI ROLLING MILLS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR VS. ITO, JAIPUR 16 ISSUES. IT HAS BEEN FURTHER PROVIDED THAT NO APPEAL SHALL BE FILED IN RESPECT OF AN ASSESSMENT YEAR IN WHICH TAX EFFECT I S LESS THAN THE MONETARY LIMIT AS SO SPECIFIED. THEREFORE, WHERE T HERE ARE MORE THAN ONE DISPUTED ISSUES IN CASE OF AN ASSESSEE FOR THE RELE VANT ASSESSMENT YEAR, THE SUM TOTAL OF TAX EFFECT IN RESPECT OF EACH OF S UCH DISPUTED ISSUES NEEDS TO BE DETERMINED AND WHERE SUM TOTAL EXCEEDS THE PRESCRIBED THRESHOLD, THE REVENUE CAN PROCEED TO FILE THE APPE AL. IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE TAX EFFECT IN RESPECT OF DISPUTED ISSUES HAS BEEN WORKED OUT AS UNDER: DISPUTED ISSUES AY 2010-11 AY 2011-12 ADDITION FOR UNRECORDED SALES RS. 1,25,39,710/- RS. 1,35,79,972/- TRADING ADDITION RS. 5,00,000/- RS. 5,00,000/- DISALLOWANCE U/S 36 (1)(III) RS. 14,21,343/- RS. 9,10,742/- ADDITION U/S 36(1)(VA) RS. 42,688/- RS. 17,75 8/- TOTAL RS. 1,45,03,741/ - RS. 1,50,08,472 TAX RS. 49,29,822/- RS. 49,85,439/- WE THEREFORE FIND THAT FOR A.Y 2010-11, THE TAX EFF ECT IN RESPECT OF DISPUTED ISSUES COMES TO RS 49,29,822/- WHICH IS BE LOW THE PRESCRIBED THRESHOLD OF RS 50,00,000/- FOR FILING APPEAL BEFOR E THE TRIBUNAL AND THATS PRECISELY THE REASON WHY THE APPEAL OF THE R EVENUE WAS DISMISSED EARLIER BY THE TRIBUNAL ON ACCOUNT OF LOW TAX EFFECT. 18. HAVING SAID THAT, PARA 10 OF THE CBDT CIRCULAR CARVES OUT AN EXCEPTION AND STATES THAT ADVERSE JUDGMENTS SHOULD BE CONTESTED ON MERITS RELATING TO THE SPECIFIED ISSUES NOTWITHSTAN DING THAT THE TAX EFFECT ENTAILED IS LESS THAN THE MONETARY LIMITS SP ECIFIED IN PARA 3 OF THE CBDT CIRCULAR. IN THE INSTANT CASE, WE THEREFORE F IND THAT THOUGH THE M.A. NO. 50 & 51/JP/2020 M/S NATANI ROLLING MILLS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR VS. ITO, JAIPUR 17 APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IN RESPECT OF ALL THE DISPUTE D ISSUES IS BELOW THE MONETARY LIMITS, HOWEVER, DISPUTED ISSUES AS PER GR OUND NO. 1 AND 2 OF THE REVENUES APPEAL ARE COVERED BY EXCEPTION 10(E) OF THE CBDT CIRCULAR AND THEREFORE, THESE ISSUES ONLY NEEDS TO BE ADJUDICATED ON MERIT AND NOT THE REMAINING OTHER ISSUES EVEN THOUG H DISPUTED BUT BELOW THE MONETARY LIMITS. THE EXCEPTION SO CARVED OUT IN TERMS OF PARA 10 OF THE CBDT CIRCULAR IS AGAIN QUA THE INDIVIDUAL DISPUTED ISSUES AND THEREFORE, CANNOT BE READ AND UNDERSTOOD TO MEA N THAT MERELY BECAUSE CERTAIN ISSUES ARE COVERED BY EXCEPTION, BY VIRTUE OF THE SAME, THE OTHER ISSUES ARE ALSO COVERED BY EXCEPTION AND THUS, THE OTHER ISSUES EVEN THOUGH BELOW THE MONETARY LIMITS NEEDS TO BE ADJUDICATED ON MERITS. IN LIGHT OF THE SAME, WE ARE OF THE OPI NION THAT THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL NEEDS BE RECALLED TO THE LIMITED EXTEN T FOR ADJUDICATING FIRST TWO GROUNDS OF APPEAL AS COVERED BY EXCEPTION AND N O INTERFERENCE IS CALLED FOR IN RESPECT OF OTHER THREE GROUNDS OF APP EAL WHICH WERE DISMISSED ON ACCOUNT OF LOW TAX EFFECT. 19. THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 537/JP/201 8 IS ACCORDINGLY RECALLED FOR LIMITED PURPOSES OF ADJUDICATING GROUN D NO. 1 AND 2 OF THE REVENUES APPEAL AFRESH ON MERITS. SUBJECT TO THE S AME, THERE IS NO CHANGE IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. THE REGISTRY IS DIRECTED TO LIST THE MATTER IN DUE COURSE. MA NO. 51/JP/2020 20. BOTH PARTIES FAIRLY SUBMITTED THAT SIMILAR FACT AND CIRCUMSTANCES EXIST IN RESPECT OF OTHER APPEAL OF THE REVENUE FOR A.Y 2011-12 AND THE MISC. APPLICATION SO FILED BY THE REVENUE, THEREFOR E, OUR FINDINGS AND DIRECTIONS CONTAINED IN MA NO. 50/JP/2020 SHALL APP LY MUTATIS MUTANDIS M.A. NO. 50 & 51/JP/2020 M/S NATANI ROLLING MILLS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR VS. ITO, JAIPUR 18 TO MA NO. 51/JP/2020. THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 538/JP/2018 IS ACCORDINGLY RECALLED FOR ADJUDICATIN G GROUND NO. 1 AND 2 OF THE REVENUES APPEAL AFRESH ON MERITS. THE REGI STRY IS DIRECTED TO LIST THE MATTER IN DUE COURSE. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS SO FILED BY THE REVENUE ARE DISPOSED OFF IN LIGHT OF AFORESAID DIRE CTIONS. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 10/09/2020. SD/- SD/- FOT; IKY JKO FOE FLAG ;KNO (VIJAY PAL RAO) (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 10/09/2020. * GANESH KR. VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- M/S NATANI ROLLING MILLS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- ITO, WARD 4(2), JAIPUR 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR. 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE {M.A NO. 50 & 51/JP/2020} VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASST. REGISTRAR