INCOME TAX OFFICER 26(2)(1), MUMBAI V. KAVITA RAMESH HULE, MUMBAI

MA 63/MUM/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4393 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 10-05-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 30-01-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL H BENCH MUMB AI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, VICE- PRESIDENT AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A. NO. 63/MUM/2019 IN ITA NO. 5883/MUM/2017 (A.Y 2009-10 ) ITO-26(2)(1), ROOM NO. 709, 7 TH FLOOR, C-11, PRATYAKSHKAR BHAVAN, BKC, BANDRA, MUMBAI-400051. VS. KAVITA RAMESH HULE PROP. OF M/S. RMC LABORATORIES, D-304, SUNSHRUTI, SAKIVIHAR ROAD, ANDHERI(E), MUMBAI-400072. PAN: ABPPH4244K APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI MANJUNATH KARKIHALLI (DR) RESPONDENT BY : NONE DATE OF HEARING : 10.05.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 10.05.2019 ORDER UNDER SECTION 254(2)OF INCOME TAX ACT PER PAWAN SINGH, J.M. 1. THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION (MA) IS FILED BY THE REVENUE FOR RECTIFICATION OF THE ALLEGED MISTAKE IN THE ORDER DATED 10.08.201 8 PASSED IN ITA NO. 5883/MUM/2017 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR (AY) 2009-10. IN THE APPLICATION, THE APPLICANT/REVENUE PLEADED THAT ALTHOUGH THE TAX EFF ECT INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IS BELOW THE REVISED MONETARY LIMIT OF RS. 20,00,00 0/- AS PRESCRIBED IN CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 3/2018 DATED 11.07.2018, YET AS THIS C ASE FALLS WITHIN EXCEPTION PROVIDED IN PARA-10E OF THE CIRCULAR. IT IS CONTEND ED THAT PARA-10E OF THE SAID CIRCULAR CLEARLY SPECIFIES THAT THE CASES SHOULD BE CONTEST ON MERIT INSPITE THE FACT THAT TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN THE MONETARY LIMI T IN THE CASES WHERE ADDITION IS BASED ON THE INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM EXTERNAL SOURCES IN THE NATURE OF LAW ENFORCING AGENCY. IN THIS CASE, THE ADDITION WA S MADE ON THE BASIS OF INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM DIRECTORATE OF GST (INTEL LIGENCE), GOVERNMENT OF MA .63/MUM/2019- KAVITA RAMESH HULE 2 MAHARASHTRA. THE APPLICANT/REVENUE PLEADED THAT THE ORDER DATED 10.08.2018 REQUIRE RECTIFICATION BY RECALLING THE ORDER, WHICH IS MISTAKE APPARENT ON RECORD. 2. THE LD. DR FOR THE REVENUE MADE HIS SUBMISSION ON S IMILAR LINES. 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSION OF LD. DR FOR THE REVENUE AND HAVE GONE THROUGH THE CIRCULAR NO. 3/2018 DATED 11.07.2018. W E HAVE ALSO PERUSED THE CONTENTS OF CBDT CIRCULAR DATED 20 TH AUGUST 2018 WHEREIN PARA-10 OF CIRCULAR NO. 3/2018 DATED 11.07.2018 WAS AMENDED TH EREBY INSERTING CLAUSE (A) TO (F) IN PARA-10. PARA-4 OF THE CIRCULAR CLEAR LY SPECIFIED 4. THE SAID MODIFICATION SHALL COME INTO EFFECT FROM THE DATE O F ISSUE OF THIS LETTER. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSION OF LD. DR FOR THE REVENUE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE MODIFICATION IN CLAUSE 10 WAS INSERTED IN CIRCULAR NO.3/2018 DATED 11.07.2018 W.E.F. 20 TH AUGUST 2018. HOWEVER, BEFORE THE MODIFICATION WAS INSERTED VIZ. CLAUSE (A) TO (F) IN PARA-10 OF CIRCULAR NO. 3/2018, THE TRIBUNAL, WHILE ACTING ON CIRCULAR HAS ALREADY DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE. THEREFORE, IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW, THE AMENDED/MODIFIED PARA-10 (A) TO (E) IS NOT APPLICAB LE ON THE ORDER PASSED BY TRIBUNAL BEFORE 20 TH AUGUST 2018. 4. IN THE RESULT, MA FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 10.05.2019. SD/- SD/- G.S. PANNU PAWAN SING H VICE-PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATE: 10.05.2019 MA .63/MUM/2019- KAVITA RAMESH HULE 3 SK COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. ASSESSEE 2. RESPONDENT 3. THE CONCERNED CIT(A) 4. THE CONCERNED CIT 5. DR H BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER, DY./ASST. REGISTRAR ITAT, MUMBAI