Latest Expert Exchange Queries

GST Demo Service software link:
Username: demouser Password: demopass
Get your inventory and invoicing software GST Ready from Binarysoft
sitemapHome | Registration | Job Portal for CA's | Expert Exchange | Currency Converter | Post Matrimonial Ads | Post Property Ads
News shortcuts: From the Courts | News Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | ICAI | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing | GST - Goods and Services Tax
Popular Search: form 3cd :: VAT RATES :: ICAI offer Get Windows 7,Office 2010 in Rs.799 Taxes :: empanelment :: TDS :: TAX RATES - GOODS TAXABLE @ 4% :: due date for vat payment :: ACCOUNTING STANDARDS :: cpt :: list of goods taxed at 4% :: ARTICLES ON INPUT TAX CREDIT IN VAT :: Central Excise rule to resale the machines to a new company :: articles on VAT and GST in India :: ACCOUNTING STANDARD :: VAT Audit
From the Courts »
 Commissioner Of Income Tax, Delhi Vs. M/s. Maruti Udyog Ltd
 Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax - 6 Vs. M/s. Mohan Export India Private Limited
 Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-7 Vs. Oriental International Co. Pvt. Ltd.
 Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-2 Vs. British Motor Car Co.(1934) Ltd
  Vidyadayani Shiksha Samiti vs. CIT (ITAT Delhi)
 Halcrow Consulting India Pvt. Ltd vs. DCIT (ITAT Delhi)
 ACIT vs. TRN Energy Pvt. Ltd (ITAT Delhi)
 Aditya Chemicals Ltd vs. ITO (ITAT Delhi)
 Gayatri Aggarwal Vs. Income Tax Commissioner & Ors.
 Paradigm Geophysical Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax (International Taxation)-3, New Delhi
 Download Companies (Amendment) Act, 2017

Income Tax Officer, Ward-12(2), CR Bldg., New Delhi Vs. M/s G. Ram Books Pvt. Ltd., A-9, East Krishna Nagar, Delhi 110 051
December, 02nd 2015
                  DELHI BENCH `C', NEW DELHI


                      ITA No. 2709/Del/2012
                     Assessment Year: 2000-01

     Income Tax Officer,         vs.   M/s G. Ram Books Pvt. Ltd.,
     Ward-12(2), CR Bldg.,             A-9, East Krishna Nagar,
     New Delhi                         Delhi ­ 110 051
                                       (PAN: AABCG2063P)
     (Appellant)                       (Respondent)

               Appellant by  : Ms. Anima Barnwal, Sr. DR
               Respondent by : None

                   Date of Hearing : 30-11-2015
                   Date of Order    : 01-12-2015



     This appeal by the Department is directed against the Order dated
14.3.2012   of Ld. CIT(A)-V, New Delhi    pertaining to assessment year
2.   The grounds raised in the appeal of the Department read as under:
     "1.   Ld. CIT(A) erred, in law and on the facts and
     circumstances of the case, in deleting the addition of Rs.
     10,05,000/- made by the AO u/s. 68 of the I.T. Act being
     unexplained credits.

     2. Ld. CIT(A) erred, in law and on the facts and circumstances
     of the case, in deleting the addition of Rs. 10,05,000/-
     ignoring the facts and findings that the investors are mere
     entry operators.

     3.    The appellant craves to add, alter, amend, modify, add
     or forego any ground of appeal at any time before or durinmg
     the hearing of this appeal."
       ITA No.2709/DEL/2012                                            2

3.     At the time of hearing, we note that the tax effect in this appeal is
less than Rs.4,00,000/-, therefore, the Department ought not to have
filed this appeal in view of the circular issued by the CBDT and the
provisions contained in the section 268A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
4.     Ld. DR supported the order of the AO.
5.      In this case, Notice of hearing to the assessee was sent by the
Registered AD post, in spite of the same, assessee, nor his authorized
representative appeared to prosecute the matter in dispute, nor filed any
application    for   adjournment.      Keeping    in   view   the   facts   and
circumstances of the present case and the issue involved in the present
Appeal, we are of the view that no useful purpose would be served to
issue notice again and again to the assessee, therefore, we are deciding
the present appeal exparte qua assessee, after hearing the Ld. DR and
perusing the records.
6.     After hearing the Ld. DR and perusing the material on record, it is
noticed that section 268A has been inserted by the Finance Act, 2008
with retrospective effect from 01/04/1999. The relevant provisions
contained in section 268A read as under:
     "268A. (1) The Board may, from time to time, issue orders,
     instructions or directions to other income-tax authorities, fixing
     such monetary limits as it may deem fit, for the purpose of
     regulating filing of appeal or application for reference by any
     income-tax authority under the provisions of this Chapter.
     (2) Where, in pursuance of the orders, instructions or directions
     issued under sub-section (1), an income-tax authority has not
     filed any appeal or application for reference on any issue in the
     case of an assessee for any assessment year, it shall not
     preclude such authority from filing an appeal or application for
     reference on the same issue in the case of ­
     (a) the same assessee for any other assessment year; or
     (b) any other assessee for the same or any other assessment
     (3) Notwithstanding that no appeal or application for reference
     has been filed by an income-tax authority pursuant to the
     orders or
     instructions or directions issued under sub-section (1), it shall
     not be lawful for an assessee, being a party in any appeal or
     reference, to contend that the income-tax authority has
       ITA No.2709/DEL/2012                                          3

     acquiesced in the decision on the disputed issue by not filing
     an appeal or application for reference in any case.
     (4) The Appellate Tribunal or Court, hearing such appeal or
     reference, shall have regard to the orders, instructions or
     directions issued under sub-section (1) and the circumstances
     under which such appeal or application for reference was filed
     or not filed in respect of any case.
     (5) Every order, instruction or direction which has been issued
     by the Board fixing monetary limits for filing an appeal or
     application for reference shall be deemed to have been issued
     under sub-section (1) and the provisions of sub-sections (2), (3)
     and (4) shall apply accordingly."

6.     It is not in dispute that the Board's instruction or directions issued
to the other income-tax authorities are binding on those authorities,
therefore, the Department ought not to have filed the appeal in view of
the above mentioned section 268A since the tax effect in the instant case
is less than the amount prescribed for not filing the appeal.
7.     It is noticed that the CBDT has issued Instruction No. 5/2014
dated 10th July, 2014, by which the CBDT has revised the monetary limit
to Rs. 4,00,000/- for filing the appeal before the Tribunal.
8.     Keeping in view the CBDT Instruction No. 5 of 2014 dated 10th
July, 2014 and also the provisions of section 268A of Income Tax Act,
1961, we are of the view that the Revenue should not have filed the
instant appeal before the Tribunal.      While taking such a view, we are
fortified by the following decisions of the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High
     1. CIT vs. Oscar Laboratories P. Ltd. (2010) 324 ITR 115 (P&H);
     2. CIT vs. Abinash Gupta (2010) 327 ITR 619 (P&H);
     3. CIT vs. Varindera Construction Co. (2011) 331 ITR 449 (P&H) (FB).

9.     Similarly, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Delhi

Race Club Ltd. in ITA No. 128/2008, order dated 03.03.2011 by following

the earlier order dated 02.08.2010 in ITA No. 179/1991 in the case of

CIT Delhi-III vs. M/s P.S. Jain & Co. held that such circular would also

be applicable to pending cases.
       ITA No.2709/DEL/2012                                        4

10.    Thus, from the ratio laid down by the Hon'bl Delhi High Court, it is
clear that the instructions issued in the circulars by CBDT are applicable
for pending cases also. Therefore, by keeping in view the ratio laid down
in the aforesaid referred to case, we are of the considered view that
Instruction No. 5 of 2014 dated 10th July, 2014 issued by the CBDT are
applicable for the pending cases also and in the said instructions,
monetary tax limit for not filing the appeal before the ITAT is Rs.
11.    In view of the above, without going into merit of the case, we
dismiss the appeal filed by the Revenue.
12.    In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.
       Order pronounced in the Open Court on 01/12/2015.

             Sd/-                                           Sd/-

       (O.P. KANT)                                 (H.S. SIDHU)
       ACCOUNTANT MEMBER                         JUDICIAL MEMBER

Dated: 01/12/2015


Copy   forwarded to: -
1.     Appellant
2.     Respondent
3.     CIT
4.     CIT(A)
5.     DR, ITAT
                         TRUE COPY
                                                By Order,

                                                 ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2018 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
SEO Services SEO LLC e-boost Search Engine Optimization Services Internet Marketing Services Website Placement Services On-site Webs

Transfer Pricing | International Taxation | Business Consulting | Corporate Compliance and Consulting | Assurance and Risk Advisory | Indirect Taxes | Direct Taxes | Transaction Advisory | Regular Compliance and Reporting | Tax Assessments | International Taxation Advisory | Capital Structuring | Withholding tax advisory | Expatriate Tax Reporting | Litigation | Badges | Club Badges | Seals | Military Insignias | Emblems | Family Crest | Software Development India | Software Development Company | SEO Company | Web Application Development | MLM Software | MLM Solutions