DCIT, JAIPUR vs. GOVIND NARAIN JOHARI, JAIPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 318/JPR/2017Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 August 2018AY 2010-114 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the assessee's cross-objection as not pressed. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed as not maintainable due to the tax effect being below the threshold limit specified in the CBDT circular.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the deletion of an interest expense addition by the CIT(A). The assessee also filed a cross-objection challenging the AO's order. During the hearing, the assessee did not press their grounds, and the Revenue's appeal was found to be below the monetary limit prescribed by a CBDT circular.

What were the issues?

Maintainability of Revenue's appeal due to low tax effect as per CBDT circular. Whether the assessee's grounds in the cross-objection should be pressed.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

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. 318/JP/2017

Hearing: 24/08/2018Pronounced: 28/08/2018

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No. 318/JP/2017
C.O. No. 17/JP/2017

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

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. 318/JP/2017 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2010-11 cuke Deputy Commissioner of Govind Narain Johari, Vs. Income Tax, C-7, Prithiviraj Road, C-Scheme, Central Circle-3, Jaipur. Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAQPJ 4277 Q vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent izR;k{ksi.k@C.O. No. 17/JP/2017 (Arising out of vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 318/JP/2017) fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year 2010-11 cuke Govind Narain Johari, Deputy Commissioner of Vs. C-7, Prithiviraj Road, C- Income Tax, Scheme, Jaipur. Central Circle-3, Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAQPJ 4277 Q izR;k{ksid@Objector izR;FkhZ@Respondent jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri J. S. Kulhari (JCIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Sandeep Jhanwar (CA) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 24/08/2018 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@ Date of Pronouncement : 28/08/2018 vkns'k@ ORDER

PER: VIJAY PAL RAO, JM: The appeal filed by the Revenue and the cross objection filed by the assessee are directed against the order of the ld. CIT(A)-4, Jaipur

ITA 318/JP/2017 & C.O. 17/JP/2017_ 2 DCIT Vs Govind Narain Johari dated 30/03/2017 for the A.Y. 2010-11. The grounds taken by the

Revenue and the assessee are as under:-

Grounds of revenue’s appeal: “1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld CIT(A) was right in deleting the addition of Rs. 40,60,300/- made by A.O. on account of interest expenses.”

2.

The appellate craves, leave to reserve the right to amend, modify, alter add or forego any ground(s) or appeal at any time before or during the hearing of this appeal.”

Grounds of assessee’s C.O.: “Under the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in not quashing the order passed by ld. A.O. U/s 153A/143(3) which is illegal and bad in law for the following reasons: i) It was barred by limitation.

ii) None of the additions/disallowances were made on the basis of any incriminating material found during the course of search.”

2.

Firstly we take C.O. of the assessee. At the outset of hearing, the

ld AR of the assessee has stated that he doesn’t wish to press the

grounds so taken in the cross objection therefore, the same may be

dismissed as not pressed. On the other hand, the ld DR has not raised

any objection if the assessee does not want to press the grounds of C.O.

Therefore, the grounds taken by the assessee in the C.O. are dismissed

being not pressed.

3.

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

ITA 318/JP/2017 & C.O. 17/JP/2017_ 3 DCIT Vs Govind Narain Johari appeal of the Revenue due to the tax effect not exceeding Rs. 20 lacs as per the CBDT Circle No. 3 of 2018 dated 11th July, 2018. The ld. A/R

submitted that in the facts of the present case, tax effect in Revenue’s

appeal is stated to be below the prescribed limit of Rs. 20 lacs.

4.

The ld. D/R has fairly submitted that the tax effect involved in the

Revenue’s appeal is less than 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.

5.

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 I T 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.

6.

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

the departmental appeals pending before ITAT where the demand/tax

ITA 318/JP/2017 & C.O. 17/JP/2017_ 4 DCIT Vs Govind Narain Johari effect is not exceeding than 20 lacs should be either withdrawn or not

pressed by the departmental representatives.

7.

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

Department is dismissed as not pressed/withdrawn.

8.

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 28/08/2018.

Sd/- Sd/- ¼foØe flag ;kno½ ¼fot; iky jko½ (Vikram Singh Yadav) (Vijay Pal Rao) ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:-28/08/2018 *Ranjan आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू 1. vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- The DCIT, Central Circle-3, Jaipur. 2. izR;FkhZ@The Respondent- Shri Govind Narain Johari, Jaipur 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. 318/JP/2017 & CO 17/JP/2017) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,

सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेज. त्महपेजतंत

More judgments on Section 268A

All 3,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 268A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →