Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR
Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 1046/JP/2016
आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR Jh fot; iky jko] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 1046/JP/2016 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2013-14 cuke Asstt. Commissioner of M/s Shri Krishana Construction Co., Vs. Income Tax Circle, Gayatri Market, Chirawa, Jhunjhunu Jhunjhunu LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ABGFS4261G vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent izR;k{ksi.k@C.O. No. 04/JP/2017 (Arising out of vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 1046/JP/2016) fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year 2013-14 cuke M/s Shri Krishana Construction Asstt. Commissioner Vs. Co., Gayatri Market, Chirawa, of Income Tax Jhunjhunu Circle, Jhunjhunu LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ABGFS4261G izR;k{ksid@Objector izR;FkhZ@Respondent jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri Roshanta Meena (JCIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Manish Dharnidharka (CA) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 23/08/2018 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@ Date of Pronouncement : 23/08/2018 vkns'k@ ORDER
PER: VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M.: This is the appeal filed by the Revenue and the cross objection filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A)-III, Jaipur dated 26/09/2016 pertaining to the A.Y. 2013-14 wherein the Revenue and the assessee have taken following grounds of appeal:-
2 ITA 1046/JP/2016 & C.O. 04/JP/2017_ ACIT, Circle Jhunjhunu Vs M/s Shri Kirshana Construction, Jhunjhunu
Grounds of revenue’s appeal:
“(i) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in reducing NP rate from 8% to 5.5% ignoring the fact that the assessee did not maintain details of consumption of material of Rs. 11,53,00,002/-.
(ii) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 3,77,996/- u/s 40(a)(ia) because the assessee was liable to deduct tax on payment of interest to non banking financial companies.”
Grounds of assessee’s C.O.:
On the facts & circumstances of the case ld. Lower authorities grossly erred in confirming the rejection of books of account by invoking provision of section 145(3).
On the facts & circumstances of the case ld. CIT(A) grossly erred in confirming the addition in the declared income by estimating 5.5% N.P. rate instead of declared N.P. rate of 1.33%.
On the facts & circumstances of the case ld. CIT(A) grossly erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 10,020/- on undisclosed receipts of Rs. 1,25,250/-.
Firstly, we will take up the cross objection filed by the assessee wherein he has challenged the action of the Assessing Officer in invoking the provisions of section 145(3) and estimating N.P. rate
2.1 At the outset of hearing, the ld AR of the assessee stated that he doesn’t wish to press the grounds so taken in the assessee’s C.O., therefore, the same stands dismissed as not pressed.
Now we take the revenue’s appeal. At the time of hearing, the ld. AR of the assessee has raised an objection of maintainability of the appeal of the Revenue due to the tax effect not exceeding Rs. 20 lacs as per the CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018 dated 11th July, 2018.
3 ITA 1046/JP/2016 & C.O. 04/JP/2017_ ACIT, Circle Jhunjhunu Vs M/s Shri Kirshana Construction, Jhunjhunu
3.1. The ld. D/R has fairly submitted that the tax effect involved in the Revenue’s appeal comes to Rs 10,95,167/- less than Rs 20 lacs which is prescribed threshold limit in terms of the CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11th July, 2018 issued in supersession of its earlier Circular No. 21 of 2015 dated 10.12.2015.
We have heard the rival contentions and perused the materials available on record. It is observed that the demand/ tax effect in the Revenue’s appeal in question is below Rs. 20.00 lacs. Under the powers vested by section. 268A(1) of the IT Act, CBDT has recently issued Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11th July, 2018 (F No. 279/Misc. 142/2007- ITJ(Pt) instructing the authorities below that departmental appeal should not be filed before ITAT where the demand/tax effect does not exceed Rs. 20 lacs. The circular is specifically mentioned to be applicable for all pending appeals.
Subject to some exceptions, it is further directed by CBDT that all the departmental appeals pending before ITAT where the demand/tax effect is not exceeding than 20 lacs should be either withdrawn or not pressed by the departmental representatives.
The present appeal is not covered by any exceptions mentioned in the said CBDT circular. Since the tax demand in dispute in this departmental appeal is below the limit set out by CBDT for the appeal, the appeal of the assessee is not maintainable in view of CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018 dated 11.07.2018. Accordingly the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as not pressed/withdrawn.
4 ITA 1046/JP/2016 & C.O. 04/JP/2017_ ACIT, Circle Jhunjhunu Vs M/s Shri Kirshana Construction, Jhunjhunu
In the result, both the appeal of the Revenue and the C.O. of the assessee are dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 23/08/2018
Sd/- Sd/- ¼fot; iky jko½ ¼foØe flag ;kno½ (Vijay Pal Rao) (Vikram Singh Yadav) U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member
Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 23/08/2018 *Ganesh Kr. आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू 1. vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- ACIT, Jhunjhunu 2. izR;FkhZ@The Respondent- Shri Krishana Construction Co., Jhunjhunu 3. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT 4. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT(A) 5. विभागीय प्रतिनिधि] आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर@क्त्ए प्ज्Aज्ए Jंपचनत 6. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No. 1046/JP/2016 & CO 04/JP/2017) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,
सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेज. त्महपेजतंत