DCIT, Chandigarh V. M/s Ajay Sangari & Co., Chandigarh

MA 63/CHANDI/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6575 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 21-05-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 17-05-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S K MUKHI
• Keywords: Audit objection; Tax effect
• Section: 154

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES, A CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER & MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. NO. 63/CHD/2016 (IN ITA NO. 860/CHD/2015) (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10) THE DCIT, VS. M/S AJAY SANGRI & CO., CIRCLE 3(1), #1240, SECSTOR 22-B, CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH PAN NO. AABFA7186L (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SH. S.K. MUKHI, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : SMT. CHANDERKANTA, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING : 23.03.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21.05.2018 ORDER PER SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE PRESENT MISC. APPLICATION HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE DEPARTMENT PLEADING THEREIN THAT EARLIER THE APPEAL OF THE REV ENUE WAS DISMISSED BY THE TRIBUNAL WHILE RELYING UPON THE CIRCULAR NO.21/ 2015 DATED 10.12.2015 ON THE GROUND THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN THIS APPEAL WA S LESS THAN RS. 10 LACS. HOWEVER, THIS CASE WAS COVERED UNDER THE EXCEPTIONS AS PROVIDED IN THE CIRCULAR, HENCE, THE APPEAL WAS NOT LIABLE TO BE DI SMISSED ON THE GROUND OF TAX EFFECT. 2 2. THE REVENUE HAS RELIED UPON PARA 8 OF THE CIRCUL AR DATED 10.12.2015, WHICH FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE IS REPRODUCED HER EIN UNDER:- ADVERSE JUDGMENTS RELATING TO THE FOLLOWING ISSUE S SHOULD BE CONTESTED ON MERITS NOTWITHSTANDING THAT THE TAX EFFECT ENTAILED IS LESS THAN THE MONETARY L IMITS SPECIFIED IN PARA 3 ABOVE OR THERE IS NO TAX EFFECT : (A) WHERE THE CONSTITUTIONAL VALIDITY OF THE PROVISIONS OF AN ACT OR RULE ARE UNDER CHALLENGE, OR (B) WHERE BOARDS ORDER, NOTIFICATION, INSTRUCTION OR CIRCULAR HAS BEEN HELD TO BE ILLEGAL OR ULTRA VIRES, OR (C) WHERE REVENUE AUDIT OBJECTION IN THE CASE HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT, OR (D) WHERE THE ADDITION RELATES TO UNDISCLOSED FOREIGN ASSETS/ BANK ACCOUNTS . 3. THE LD. DR HAS FURTHER INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO THE AUDIT OBJECTION RAISED VIDE LETTER DATED 10.10.2012 AND FURTHER LET TER DATED 25.3.2013 OF THE ACIT VIDE WHICH THE AUDIT OBJECTION HAS BEEN ACCEPT ED BY THE DEPARTMENT AND THEREBY DEMAND OF RS. 3,55,250/- WAS CREATED U/ S 154 OF THE ACT. IN VIEW OF THIS, THE PRESENT APPEAL IS COVERED UNDER T HE EXCEPTION (C) OF PARA 8 OF THE CIRCULAR AS REPRODUCED ABOVE. 4. IN VIEW OF THIS, IT CAN BE SAFELY SAID THAT AN E RROR APPARENT ON RECORD IS OCCURRED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE ON THE GROUND OF TAX EFFECT. THE ORDER DATED 28.12.2015 PASSED IN ITA N O. 860/CHD/2015, IS THEREFORE, RECALLED AND THE APPEAL IS RESTORED TO I TS ORIGINAL POSITION TO BE HEARD AFRESH IN REGULAR COURSE. REGISTRY IS DIRECTE D TO FIX THE DATE OF 3 HEARING AND INFORM THE PARTIES. COPY OF THIS ORDER BE PLACED IN THE MAIN APPEAL FILE. IN THE RESULT, THE MISC. APPLICATION STANDS ALLOWED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21.05.2018 SD/- SD/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (SANJAY GARG) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 21 .05.2018 RKK COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR