The ITO, Vapi Ward-1, Vapi V. Shri Harishankar Ambikaprasad Singh, SILVASSA

MA 87/AHD/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0011 (ITAT-SURAT)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 9 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 18-12-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 06-03-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANUPAMA SINGLA
• Keywords: Tax effect
• Section: 254(2)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & DR. A. L. SAINI, AM MA NO.87/AHD/2017 [ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.348/AHD/2012] ASSESSMENT YEAR: (2005-06) (VIRTUAL COURT HEARING) INCOME TAX OFFICER, VAPI WARD, VAPI VS. SHRI HARISHANKAR AMBIKAPRASAD SINGH, GALA NO.102, B-SHALIMAR IND. ESTATE, DAYAT FALIA, SILVASSA. ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO.: ABBPS2491M (ASSESSEE) (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : MS ANUPAMA SINGLA SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : NONE FOR ASSESSEE. / DATE OF HEARING : 27/11/2020 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 08/12/2020 / O R D E R PER DR. A. L. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: BY WAY OF THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION, THE REVENUE POINTED OUT THAT A MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 254(2) CREPT IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 30.05.2016. 2. THE CASE OF THE REVENUE IN THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IS THAT NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT TO THE RESPONDED ASSESSEE THROUGH THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR EFFECTIVE SERVICE ON THE RESPONDED ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, THE DEPARTMENT FAILED TO SEND NOTICE ON THE RESPONDED ASSESSEE; THEREFORE TRIBUNAL HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF REVENUE. NOW, BY WAY OF THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION, THE REVENUE HAS PRAYED THE BENCH THAT ASSESSEE IS TRACEABLE AS NOTICES OF HEARING WERE SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE THROUGH INCOME TAX OFFICE, SILVASSA, THEREFORE, ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 30.05.2016 SHOULD BE RECALLED AND REVENUES APPEAL SHOULD BE HEARD ON MERITS. PAGE | 2 MA 87/AHD/201 7 ASSESSMENT YEAR.2005- 06 HARISHANKAR AMBIKAPRASAD SINGH 3. LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITS BEFORE THE BENCH THAT TRIBUNAL HAS NOT ADJUDICATED REVENUES APPEAL ON MERIT. THE TRIBUNAL HAD GIVEN RESPONSIBILITY TO THE DEPARTMENT TO SERVE NOTICE ON THE RESPONDED ASSESSEE, HOWEVER THE DEPARTMENT HAS FAILED TO DO SO AT THAT POINT OF TIME, BUT LATER ON THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN TRACED BY THE DEPARTMENT, THEREFORE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 30.05.2016 SHOULD BE RECALLED AND APPEAL OF THE REVENUE SHOULD BE HEARD ON MERIT. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR REVENUE AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 30.05.2016. WE NOTE THAT TRIBUNAL HAS GIVEN LIBERTY TO RECALL THE ORDER IF THE RESPONDED ASSESSEE IS TRACED BY THE DEPARTMENT. NOW THE DEPARTMENT HAS TRACED THE ASSESSEE, THEREFORE, WE RECALL THE ORDER OF TRIBUNAL DATED 30.05.2016. 5. IN THE RESULT, MA NO. 87/AHD/2017 FILED BY THE REVENUE IS ALLOWED. 6. SINCE WE HAVE RECALLED THE ORDER DATED 30.05.2016, THE LD.DR ASKED TO MADE HER SUBMISSION ON MERIT. THE ATTENTION OF LD.DR FOR THE REVENUE WAS INVITED TO THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE REVENUE. THE REVENUE RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, AND IN LAW, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF EXPENSES OF RS.10,07,570/-. 2. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, AND IN LAW, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF LOANS & ADVANCES OF RS.50,89,485/-. 3. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, AND IN LAW, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.15,00,000/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNSECURED LOANS. 4. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, AND IN LAW, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF LOANS FROM BANKS OF RS.8,22,978/-. 7. AFTER GOING THROUGH THE VARIOUS GROUNDS OF APPEAL, THE LD.DR FOR THE REVENUE HAS FAIRLY AGREED THAT TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN ALL GROUNDS OF APPEAL, IS LESS THAN THE THRESHOLD OF RS.50 LAKHS FOR FILING THE APPEAL BY THE REVENUE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. AS PER THE NEW CBDT CIRCULAR NO.17/2019 DATED 8 TH AUGUST 2019, THE MONETARY LIMIT FOR PAGE | 3 MA 87/AHD/201 7 ASSESSMENT YEAR.2005- 06 HARISHANKAR AMBIKAPRASAD SINGH FILING OF APPEAL BEFORE TRIBUNAL IS AT RS.50 LAKHS. SINCE THE TAX EFFECT INVOLVED, IN THE REVENUE`S APPEAL IS BELOW RS.50 LAKHS, THEREFORE, WE DISMISS THE REVENUE`S APPEAL. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL [IN ITA NO.348/AHD/2012 FOR AY.2005-06] FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER IS PRONOUNCED ON 18/12/2020, AS PER RULE 34 OF INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RULE 1963. SD/- SD/- (PAWAN SINGH) (DR. A.L. SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER LWJR /SURAT / DATE: 18/12/2020 SAMANTA, PS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO 1. THE ASSESSEE 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. PR.CIT 5. DR/AR, ITAT, SURAT 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER // TRUE COPY // ASSISTANT REGISTRAR/SR. PS/PS ITAT, SURAT