ITO, WD-2(1), ASANSOL, Asansol V. Shri Vinod Jumrani, Burdwan

MA 99/KOL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4065 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 09-03-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 21-09-2015
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Audit objection; Tax effect

Judgement Text

MA NO. 99/KOL/2015-AM 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL : BENCH SMC : KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI N.V VASUDEVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI M.BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MISC. APPLICATION NO. 99/KOL/2015 [ ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 1651/KOL/2013 A.Y 2007-08 ] I.T.O WARD 2(1), ASANSOL VS. V INOD JUMRANI PROP : M/S. SANGITALAYA PAN: ACKPJ 6988J [ APPLICANT ] [RESPONDENT] FOR THE APPLICANT : MD. GHAYAS UDDIN, JCIT/ LD. SR.DR FOR THE RESPONDENT/ASSESSEE : NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE DATE OF HEARING : 04-03-2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 09 -03-2016 O R D E R SHRI M.BALAGANESH, AM : THIS IS A MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL PASSED IN ITA NO. 1651/KOL/20 13 DATED 04-06-2015 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. 2. MD. GHAYAS UDDIN, JCIT/ LEARNED SR.DR REPRESENT ED ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE AND NONE REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE . 3. BY VIRTUE OF THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION THE REVENUE IS TRYING TO PLEAD BEFORE US THAT AT THE TIME OF FILING OF THIS AP PEAL, THE DISPUTED ADDITION WAS MORE THAN THE MONETARY LIMITS AS PRESCRIBED BY THE CBDT. IN VIEW OF THE LATEST JUDGMENT DATED JULY 01,2015 OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN CIVIL APPEAL NOS.4919-4920 OF 2015( ARISING FROM SLP(C ) NOS. 31042-31043/2013) I N CIT-VIII NEW DELHI VS. SUMAN DHAMIJA THE REVENUE HAD PREFERRED THIS MISCE LLANEOUS APPLICATION. MA NO. 99/KOL/2015-AM 2 4. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD.DR. WE FIND THAT THE TOTAL DISPUTED ADDITION AND TAX EFFECT I N THIS APPEAL ARE OF RS.11,86,638/- AND RS. 4,03,338/-. NOW IT IS RELEVANT TO REPRODUCE THE CIRCULAR NO. 21/2015 DT. 10-12- 2015 AS BELOW :- 3. IT IS SEEN FROM THE PERUSAL OF THE RECORDS THAT THE TOTAL TAX EFFECT ON THE ADDITIONS DISPUTED BEFORE US IS ADMITTEDLY BELO W THE TAX EFFECT LIMIT PRESCRIBED BY CBDT VIDE CIRCULAR NO. 21 / 2015 DAT ED 10.12.2015 FOR PREFERRING APPEAL(S) BEFORE TRIBUNAL BY THE REVENU E. IT WILL BE PERTINENT TO REPRODUCE THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE SAID CIRCULAR NO. 21 / 2015 DATED 10.12.2015 :- 3. HENCEFORTH, APPEALS / SLPS SHALL NOT BE FILED IN CASES WHERE THE TAX EFFECT DOES NOT EXCEED THE MONETARY LIMITS GIVEN HEREUNDER :- S.NO. APPEALS IN INCOME TAX MATTERS MONETARY LIMIT (IN RS) 1 BEFORE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 10,00,000/- 2 BEFORE HIGH COURT 20,00,000/- 3 BEFORE SUPREME COURT 25,00,000/- 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 HA VE BEEN CHARGEABLE HAD SUCH TOTAL INCOME BEEN REDUCED BY THE AMOUNT OF INC OME IN RESPECT OF THE ISSUES AGAINST WHICH APPEAL IS INTENDED TO BE FILED (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS DISPUTED ISSUES). HOWEVER, THE TAX WILL NOT INCLUDE ANY INTEREST THEREON, EXCEPT WHERE CHARGEABILITY OF INTEREST ITS ELF IS IN DISPUTE. IN CASE THE CHARGEABILITY OF INTEREST IS THE ISSUE UNDER DI SPUTE, THE AMOUNT OF INTEREST SHALL BE THE TAX EFFECT. IN CASES WHERE R ETURNED LOSS IS REDUCED OR ASSESSED AS INCOME, THE TAX EFFECT WOULD INCLUDE NO TIONAL TAX ON DISPUTED ADDITIONS. IN CASE OF PENALTY ORDERS, THE TAX EFF ECT WILL MEAN QUANTUM OF PENALTY DELETED OR REDUCED IN THE ORDER TO BE APPEA LED AGAINST. 5. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL CALCULATE THE TAX EF FECT SEPARATELY FOR EVERY ASSESSMENT YEAR IN RESPECT OF THE DISPUTED ISSUES I N THE CASE OF EVERY ASSESSEE. IF, IN THE CASE OF AN ASSESSEE, THE DISP UTED ISSUES ARISE IN MORE THAN ONE ASSESSMENT YEAR , APPEAL, CAN BE FILED IN RESPECT OF SUCH ASSESSMENT YEAR OR YEARS IN WHICH THE TAX EFFECT IN RESPECT OF THE DISPUTED MA NO. 99/KOL/2015-AM 3 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 SPECIFIED IN PARA 3. IN OT HER WORDS, HENCEFORTH, APPEALS CAN BE FILED ONLY WITH REFERENCE TO THE TAX EFFECT IN THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR. HOWEVER, IN CASE OF A COMPOSITE ORDER OF ANY HIGH COURT OR APPELLATE AUTHORITY, WHICH INVOLVES MORE T HAN ONE ASSESSMENT YEAR AND COMMON ISSUES IN MORE THAN ONE ASSESSMENT YEAR, APPEAL SHALL BE FILED IN RESPECT OF ALL SUCH ASSESSMENT YEARS EVEN IF THE TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN THE PRESCRIBED MONETARY LIMITS IN ANY OF THE Y EAR(S), IF IT IS DECIDED TO FILE APPEAL IN RESPECT OF THE YEAR(S) IN WHICH TAX EFFECT EXCEEDS THE MONETARY LIMIT PRESCRIBED. IN CASE WHERE A COMPOSI TE ORDER / JUDGEMENT INVOLVES MORE THAN ONE ASSESSEE, EACH ASSESSEE SHAL L BE DEALT WITH SEPARATELY. 8. ADVERSE JUDGEMENTS RELATING TO THE FOLLOWING ISS UES SHOULD BE CONTESTED ON MERITS NOTWITHSTANDING THAT THE TAX EFFECT ENTAI LED IS LESS THAN THE MONETARY LIMITS 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 C IRCULAR 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 A SSETS / BANK ACCOUNTS. 10. THIS INSTRUCTION WILL APPLY RETROSPECTIVELY TO PENDING APPEALS AND APPEALS TO BE FILED HENCEFORTH IN HIGH COURTS/ TRIB UNALS. PENDING APPEALS BELOW THE SPECIFIED TAX LIMITS IN PARA 3 ABOVE MAY BE WITHDRAWN / NOT PRESSED. APPEALS BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT WILL BE GOVERNED BY THE INSTRUCTIONS ON THIS SUBJECT, OPERATIVE AT THE TIME WHEN SUCH APPEAL WAS FILED. IN VIEW OF THE LATEST CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 21/2015 DAT ED 10-12-2015 FIXING THE MONETARY LIMITS FOR FILING THE APPEAL(S) BY THE RE VENUE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, THE SAME IS ALSO APPLICABLE FOR PENDING OF APPEAL(S) BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. WE FEEL THAT THIS CASE SQUARELY FALLS WITHIN THE AMBIT OF PRESENT CBDT CIR CULAR (SUPRA). WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT RECALLING THE EARLIER ORDER DATED 04 -06-2015 BY ALLOWING THIS MISC. APPLICATION U/S. 254(2) OF THE ACT WOULD NOT ADVANC E THE CASE OF THE REVENUE, WHICH IN MA NO. 99/KOL/2015-AM 4 ANY CASE IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED IN VIEW OF APPLI CABILITY OF SAID CBDTS LATEST CIRCULAR (SUPRA). 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISC. APPLICATION FILED BY THE REVENUE STANDS DISMISSED. THIS ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 09 -03-2016 SD/- SD/- [ N.V.VASUDEVAN ] [ M.BALAGANE SH ] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMB ER DATED 09 -03-2016 **PRADIP SPS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. APPLICANT: ITO W 2(1), ASANSOL, PARMAR BUILDING, GT ROAD (W), ASANSOL. 2. RESPONDENT: SHRI VINOD JUMRANI PROP: M/S. SANGITALA YA G.T ROAD, ASANSOL DIST BURDWAN (WB). 3. THE CIT(A) KOL. 4. THE CIT KOL. 5. DR,ITAT, KOL TRUE COPY TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT,KOL