ITO, Chandigarh V. Sh. Pawan Kumar Tah, Chandigarh

MA 93/CHANDI/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6552 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 30-05-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 29-09-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANJIT SINGH
• Keywords: Earning of tax free income

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH B, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A.NO.93/CHD/2016 IN ITA NO.542/CHD/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) M.A.NO.94/CHD/2016 IN ITA NO.944/CHD/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10) & M.A.NO.95/CHD/2016 IN ITA NO.696/CHD/2011 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08) THE ADDL. CIT, VS. SH.PAWAN KUMAR TAH, RANGE-III, SCO NO.1112-13, CHANDIGARH. SECTOR 22, CHANDIGARH. PAN: ABBPK3805D (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY : SHRI MANJIT SINGH, SR. DR RESPONDENT BY : NONE DATE OF HEARING : 11.05.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30.05.2018 ORDER PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, A.M . : THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE REVENUE IN RELATION TO THE CONSOLIDATE D ORDER PASSED IN ITA NOS.542, 544 & 696/CHD/2012 DATED 24.12.2014. THE REVENUE, BY WAY OF THESE MISCELLANE OUS APPLICATIONS, HAS SOUGHT RECONSIDERATION OF THE ISS UE RELATING TO THE DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENSE MADE U/S 14 A IN ALL THE AFORESAID APPEALS, WHICH HAD BEEN REMANDED BAC K TO 2 THE A.O. BY THE ITAT DIRECTING THE A.O. TO VERIFY T HE FACT WHETHER ANY EXEMPT INCOME WAS THERE DURING THE YEAR AND TO MAKE NO DISALLOWANCE IN CASE THERE WAS NO EXEMPT INCOME, FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE JURISDICTION AL HIGH COURT IN CASE OF CIT VS. LAKHANI MARKETING. THE CONTENTION OF THE REVENUE IS THAT THE SAID DIR ECTION IS AGAINST THE ACT AS WELL AS CIRCULAR NO 5/2014 DATED 11/02/2014 ISSUED BY THE CBDT. THE REVENUE THEREFOR E HAS SOUGHT RECONSIDERATION OF THE ISSUE WITH THE AFORES AID CIRCULAR, BY WAY OF THESE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIO NS. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD.DR. WE FIND NO MERIT IN PR ESENT MISC. APPLICATIONS. THE DIRECTION GIVEN BY THE ITAT , ON THE ISSUE OF DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENSES U/S 14A, IS FOLLO WING THE RATIO LAID DOWN BY THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THIS REGARD IN LAKHANI MARKETING(SUPRA).THE ITAT HAS, F OLLOWING JUDICIAL PROPRIETY, RIGHTLY FOLLOWED THE DECISION O F THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT, WHICH IN ANY CASE IS BIN DING ON IT. THE CIRCULARS ISSUED BY CBDT ARE BINDING U/S 1 19 ON ALL OFFICERS AND PERSONS EMPLOYED IN THE EXECUTION OF T HE ACT,BUT THEY CANNOT BIND THE TRIBUNAL. THEREFORE T HE DIRECTION GIVEN BY ITAT ,IN THE IMPUGNED ORDERS, FO LLOWING THE DECISION OF JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT ,IS CORRE CT AND THERE WAS NO NEED TO CONSIDER THE CBDT CIRCULAR AT ALL. 4. IN FACT WE FIND THAT THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS, AGAINST THE SETTLED PRINCIPLES OF JUD ICIAL PRECEDENCE, HAVE BEEN FILED RASHLY WITHOUT APPLICAT ION OF MIND AT ALL .IT IS THEREFORE A FIT CASE FOR LEVY O F COST ON THE 3 DEPARTMENT, FOR WASTING THE PRECIOUS TIME OF COURTS IN DEALING AND DISPOSING OFF WITH THE SAME. BUT, DURIN G THE COURSE OF HEARING OF THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS APPL ICATIONS, IT WAS PLEADED BY LD. DR THAT THE SAID APPLICATIONS WERE NOT FILED RASHLY BUT ONLY AFTER BEING SO RECOMMENDED BY THE SENIOR STANDING COUNSEL OF THE DEPARTMENT IN HIGH C OURT. THE LEGAL OPINION GIVEN BY SENIOR STANDING COUNSEL IN THIS REGARD RECOMMENDING FILING OF REVIEW APPLICATION BE FORE ITAT ON THE ISSUE, DATED 28/06/2016, WAS FILED BEFO RE US. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE WE ARE NOT IMPOSING COST ON T HE DEPARTMENT. 5. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE,ALL THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLI CATIONS FILED ARE DISMISSED ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (SANJAY GARG) (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 30 TH MAY, 2018 *RATI* COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. THE CIT 5. THE DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH