ITA No.- 5064/Del/2013 and others.
U.K. Bose.
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
(DELHI BENCH: `A': NEW DELHI)
BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER
AND
SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
ITA No:- 5064/Del/2013
(Assessment Year: 1994-95)
Dy. Commissioner of Income Sh. U.K. Bose,
Tax, Vs. 1, Kapoorthala Complex,
Central Circle-6, Aliganj, Lucknow (UP).
New Delhi.
PAN No: AFSPB7277H
APPELLANT RESPONDENT
C.O. No.-38/Del/2014
Arising from ITA No:- 5064/Del/2013
(Assessment Year: 1994-95)
Sh. U.K. Bose, Dy. Commissioner of Income
1, Kapoorthala Complex, Vs. Tax,
Aliganj, Lucknow (UP). Central Circle-6,
New Delhi.
PAN No: AFSPB7277H
APPELLANT RESPONDENT
ITA No:- 5065/Del/2013
(Assessment Year: 1995-96)
Dy. Commissioner of Income Sh. U.K. Bose,
Tax, Vs. 1, Kapoorthala Complex,
Central Circle-6, Aliganj, Lucknow (UP).
New Delhi.
PAN No: AFSPB7277H
APPELLANT RESPONDENT
Page 1 of 8
ITA No.- 5064/Del/2013 and others.
U.K. Bose.
C.O. No.-39/Del/2014
Arising from ITA No:- 5065/Del/2013
(Assessment Year: 1995-96)
Sh. U.K. Bose, Dy. Commissioner of Income
1, Kapoorthala Complex, Vs. Tax,
Aliganj, Lucknow (UP). Central Circle-6,
New Delhi.
PAN No: AFSPB7277H
APPELLANT RESPONDENT
ITA No:- 5066/Del/2013
(Assessment Year: 1996-97)
Dy. Commissioner of Income Sh. U.K. Bose,
Tax, Vs. 1, Kapoorthala Complex,
Central Circle-6, Aliganj, Lucknow (UP).
New Delhi.
PAN No: AFSPB7277H
APPELLANT RESPONDENT
C.O. No.-40/Del/2014
Arising from ITA No:- 5066/Del/2013
(Assessment Year: 1996-97)
Sh. U.K. Bose, Dy. Commissioner of Income
1, Kapoorthala Complex, Vs. Tax,
Aliganj, Lucknow (UP). Central Circle-6,
New Delhi.
PAN No: AFSPB7277H
APPELLANT RESPONDENT
Revenue by : Shri Sanjog Kapoor, Sr. DR
Assessee by : Shri Dinesh Verma, Adv. and
Shri Hardeep Singh, CA
Page 2 of 8
ITA No.- 5064/Del/2013 and others.
U.K. Bose.
CONSOLIDATED ORDER
Per Anadee Nath Misshra, AM
(A) The aforementioned appeals by Revenue and Cross Objections by Shri U.K. Bose,
are taken up together for the sake of convenience and brevity and these appeals are
hereby disposed off through this Consolidated Order; because, in these appeals the tax
effect is less than the monetary limit of Rs. 50,00,000/- fixed by the Central Board of
Direct Taxes ("CBDT", for short) in its Circular No. 17/2019 dated 08.08.2019. Grounds
taken in these appeals of Revenue are as under:
ITA No.- 5064/Del/2013
"On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has erred
in:-
1. The CIT(A) is not correct in law and facts
2. On the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has erred
in deleting the penalty of Rs. 22,56,100/- u/s 271(1)(c) of I.T. Act
levied on account of disallowance of interest on borrowed capital
used for investment in share capital as expenditure.
3. The appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend any/all grounds
of appeal before or during the course of the hearing of the appeal."
C.O. No. 38/Del/2014
"1. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in rejecting the
ground of appeal filed by the appellant wherein it was pleaded that
the order passed in barred by limitation and as such void ab-initio
and bad in law.
2. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts and circumstances
of the case in holding that the order of penalty passed by the
Assessing Officer was tenable in law as the penalty proceedings
Page 3 of 8
ITA No.- 5064/Del/2013 and others.
U.K. Bose.
stood revived in light of the provisions of section 275(1A) of the
Income Tax Act.
3. That the appellant craves leave to add, alter amend or withdrawn
why or all the grounds of cross-objection on or before the date of
hearing.
ITA No.- 5065/Del/2013
"On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has erred
in:-
1. The CIT(A) is not correct in law and facts
2. On the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has erred
in deleting the penalty of Rs. 12,51,400/- levied by AO u/s 271(1)(c)
of I.T. Act, 1961 for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income.
3. The appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend any/all grounds
of appeal before or during the course of the hearing of the appeal."
C.O. No. 39/Del/2014
"1. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in rejecting the
ground of appeal filed by the appellant wherein it was pleaded that
the order passed in barred by limitation and as such void ab-initio
and bad in law.
2. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts and circumstances
of the case in holding that the order of penalty passed by the
Assessing Officer was tenable in law as the penalty proceedings
stood revived in light of the provisions of section 275(1A) of the
Income Tax Act.
3. That the appellant craves leave to add, alter amend or withdrawn
why or all the grounds of cross-objection on or before the date of
hearing.
ITA No.- 5065/Del/2013
"On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has erred
in:-
Page 4 of 8
ITA No.- 5064/Del/2013 and others.
U.K. Bose.
1. The CIT(A) is not correct in law and facts
2. On the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has erred
in deleting the penalty of Rs. 22,77,000/- levied by AO u/s 271(1)(c)
of I.T. Act, 1961 for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income.
3. The appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend any/all grounds
of appeal before or during the course of the hearing of the appeal."
C.O. No. 40/Del/2014
"1. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in rejecting the
ground of appeal filed by the appellant wherein it was pleaded that
the order passed in barred by limitation and as such void ab-initio
and bad in law.
2. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts and circumstances
of the case in holding that the order of penalty passed by the
Assessing Officer was tenable in law as the penalty proceedings
stood revived in light of the provisions of section 275(1A) of the
Income Tax Act.
3. That the appellant craves leave to add, alter amend or withdrawn
why or all the grounds of cross-objection on or before the date of
hearing.
(A.1) During appellate proceedings in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ("ITAT", for
short), a written submissions was filed, vide letter dated 09/09/2019, relevant portion of
which is reproduced as under:
"September 09, 2019
The Registrar,
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,
Loknayak Bhawan,
Khan Market,
New Delhi-110003
Subject: Dismissal of Appeal on Tax Effect-U.K Bose
Page 5 of 8
ITA No.- 5064/Del/2013 and others.
U.K. Bose.
Dear Sir,
With reference to subject matter, we would like to apprise you that the
appeals mentioned hereunder and belonging to assessee appeared to fall in tax
effect less than Rs. 50 Lacs as mentioned in the CBDT Circular no. 17/2019 dated
08.08.2019.
A.Y. Appeal No. U/s Bench Tax Effect
1994-95 5064/D/13 271(1)(C) A 22,77,000
1995-96 5065/D/13 271(1)(C) A 12,51,400
1996-97 5066/D/13 271(1)(C) A 22,77,000
You are requested to take necessary action in order to request for disposal of
such appeal on appropriate bench.
Thanks in advance for your necessary co-operation in this matter."
(A.2) Copy of the aforesaid letter dated 09/09/2019 was also sent to the Departmental
Representative ("Ld. DR", for short).
(B) At the outset, Learned Counsel for the Assessee brought to our notice, at the time
of hearing, that tax effect in these appeals filed by Revenue is below Rs. 50,00,000/-.
Both sides, [Representatives of Revenue and the Assessee] were in agreement, at the
time of hearing before us, that the tax effect in the present appeals are below Rs.
50,00,000/-. Vide recent CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 read with earlier
CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018, dated 11.07.2018, minimum threshold limit of tax effect
for filing of appeals by Revenue in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has been enhanced to
Rs. 50,00,000/-. In a subsequent clarification issued by CBDT vide F.No. 279/Misc/M-
93/2018-ITJ, dated 20/08/2019, it has been clarified by CBDT that the aforesaid revised
monetary limit is also applicable to all pending appeals in ITAT. Having regard to the
aforesaid, learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the appeals were not
Page 6 of 8
ITA No.- 5064/Del/2013 and others.
U.K. Bose.
maintainable. The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee also submitted that Cross Objections
vide CO Numbers 38/Del/2014, 39/Del/2014 and 40/Del/2014 become infructuous on
dismissal of the Departmental Appeals. Accordingly, all the aforesaid appeals of
Revenue are dismissed being non maintainable and all the aforesaid Cross Objections
are dismissed being infructuous having regard to aforesaid CBDT Circular No. 17/2019
dated 08.08.2019 read with aforesaid CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018 in the light of
aforesaid clarification dated 20/08/2019.
(C) Before we part, we expressly clarify that Revenue will be at liberty to
approach Income Tax Appellate Tribunal U/s 254(2) of Income Tax Act, 1961;
seeking restoration of one or more of these appeals if it is found that appeal
of Revenue is not covered by aforesaid CBDT Circulars dated 08.08.2019 and
11.07.2018.
(D) In the result, these three appeals filed by Revenue are dismissed being not
maintainable and the corresponding three Cross Objections filed by Assessee are
dismissed being infructuous. Our decision was orally pronounced in Open Court after
conclusion of hearing on the date of hearing. Now this detailed written order is
pronounced in the Open Court on 19-09-2019.
Sd/- Sd/-
(H.S. SIDHU) (ANADEE NATH MISSHRA)
JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Dated: 19-09-2019
Pooja/-
Page 7 of 8
ITA No.- 5064/Del/2013 and others.
U.K. Bose.
Copy forwarded to:
1. Appellant
2. Respondent
3. CIT
4. CIT(Appeals)
5. DR: ITAT
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
ITAT NEW DELHI
Date of dictation
Date on which the typed draft is placed before the
dictating Member
Date on which the typed draft is placed before the
Other Member
Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.
PS/PS
Date on which the fair order is placed before the
Dictating Member for pronouncement
Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.
PS/PS
Date on which the final order is uploaded on the
website of ITAT
Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk
Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk
The date on which the file goes to the Assistant
Registrar for signature on the order
Date of dispatch of the Order
Page 8 of 8
|
