INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), AJMER vs. SMT. MADHU DEVI FATEHPURIA, AJMER

PDF · subscribers
ITA 794/JPR/2018Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 August 2018AY 2014-153 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the appeal was not maintainable as the tax effect was below the prescribed limit in CBDT Circular No. 3/2018. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed as not pressed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the deletion of additions made on account of bogus LTCG and commission payment. The tax effect in the appeal was below the threshold limit prescribed by the CBDT.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable before the ITAT when the tax effect is below the threshold limit specified by the CBDT circular.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 69C,Section 268A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR

Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 794/JP/2018

Hearing: 13/08/2018Pronounced: 13/08/2018

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR Jh fot; ikWy 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. 794/JP/2018 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2014-15 cuke Income- Tax Officer Smt. Madhu Devi Vs. Ward-2 (1), Ajmer Fatehpuria Ajmer LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAAPF8446R vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by: Shri J. C. Kulhari (JCIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Rohit Tiwari (Adv.) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 13/08/2018 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement : 13/08/2018 vkns'k@ ORDER

PER: VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M.

This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the order of ld. CIT (A)- Ajmer dated 26.03.2018 for Assessment Year 2014-15 wherein the Revenue has taken the following grounds of appeal:-

“In view of the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A), Ajmer has erred in:

1.

deleting the addition of Rs. 45,42,493/- made u/s 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961 on account of bogus claim of LTCG u/s 10(38) and addition of Rs. 3,17,975/- made u/s 69C of the I.T. Act for commission payment, without appreciating the facts of the case

2 ITA No. 794/JP/2018 ITO, Ward-2(1), Ajmer vs. Smt. Madhu Devi Fatepuria, Ajmer and modus operandi of the scheme which clearly prove that all the transactions were sham transactions and used as a colorable device to create documentary evidences for converting unaccounted money into tax exempt income;

2.

deleting both the additions without appreciating the fact that the assessee made bogus claim of LTCG by availing accommodation entries. M/s PS IT Infrastructure & Services Limited was one of such company whose director also admitted that this company is a paper company;

2.

The ld. D/R has submitted that the tax effect involved in the Revenue’s

appeal comes to Rs 15,01,944/- 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.

3.

We have heard both the parties and perused the material 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 11th dated 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.

4.

Subject to some exceptions, it is further directed by CBDT that all the

departmental appeals pending before ITAT where the demand/tax effect is

3 ITA No. 794/JP/2018 ITO, Ward-2(1), Ajmer vs. Smt. Madhu Devi Fatepuria, Ajmer not exceeding than 20 lacs should be either withdrawn or not pressed by the departmental representatives. 5. 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. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 13/08/2018.

Sd/- Sd/- ¼fot; ikWy 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:- 13/08/2018 *Ganesh Kr. आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू 1. vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- Income Tax Officer, Ajmer 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- Smt. Madhu Devi Fatehpuria, Ajmer 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. 794/JP/2018} vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order, सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेज. त्महपेजतंत

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →