IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCH `C', NEW DELHI
BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER
AND
SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
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
ORDER
PER H.S. SIDHU, J.M.
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
2000-01.
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
year;
(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
Court:
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.
4,00,000/-.
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
*SR BHATNAGAR*
Copy forwarded to: -
1. Appellant
2. Respondent
3. CIT
4. CIT(A)
5. DR, ITAT
TRUE COPY
By Order,
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
|
