ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, ALWAR vs. SHRI SUBHASH CHAND GUPTA, JAIPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 559/JPR/2018Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 August 2018AY 2014-155 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the assessee's cross-objection as not pressed. The Revenue's appeal was also dismissed as not maintainable due to the tax effect being below the prescribed limit as per CBDT Circular No. 3/2018.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order, and the assessee filed a cross-objection. The assessee did not press their grounds in the cross-objection. The Revenue's appeal was found to have a tax effect below the threshold limit set by CBDT circular.

What were the issues?

Maintainability of the Revenue's appeal based on tax effect and the assessee not pressing their cross-objection grounds.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 268A(1)

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. 559/JP/2018

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

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No. 559/JP/2018
C.O. No. 23/JP/2018

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. 559/JP/2018 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2014-15 cuke The ACIT, Shri Subhash Goyal, Vs. Circle-2, New Bus Stand, Alwar Industrial Area, Shahpura, Distt. Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ABQPG 5724 L vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent izR;k{ksi.k@C.O. No. 23/JP/2018 (Arising out of vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 559/JP/2018) fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year 2014-15 cuke Shri Subhash Goyal, The ACIT, Vs. New Bus Stand, Circle-2, Industrial Area, Shahpura, Distt. Alwar Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ABQPG5724L 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 S. L. Poddar (Adv.) 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), Alwar dated

ITA 559/JP/2018 & C.O. 23/JP/2018_ 2 ACIT, Alwar Vs Shri Subhash Goyal, Jaipur

01/02/2018 for the A.Y. 2014-15. The grounds taken by the Revenue and

the assessee are as under:-

Grounds of revenue’s appeal: “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 20,37,465/- made by the AO on account of commission payment to NRI without appreciating the material facts of the case.

2.

On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law ld. CIT(A) has erred in restricting the disallowance of 11,97,636/- to Rs. 1,19,763/- made by AO on account of packing labour and packing material expenses without appreciating the material facts of the case.

3.

On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 53,269/- made by the AO on account of interest payment u/s 40(a)(ia) r.w.s. 194A of the IT Act 1961.

4.

On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law ld. CIT(A) has erred in reducing the disallowance of Rs. 6,70,000/- to Rs. 67,000/- made by the AO u/s 40(a)(ia) r.w.s 194C of the IT Act 1961.”

Grounds of assessee’s C.O.: “1. That under the facts and circumstances of the case the learned CIT(A) has erred confirming the addition of Rs. 1,19,763/- on account of packing labour expenses and packing material expenses.

2.

That under the facts and circumstances of the case the learned CIT(A) has erred confirming the disallowance of excess depreciation claimed for more than 180 days for Rs. 3,75,000/-

3.

That under the facts and circumstances of the case the learned CIT(A) has erred confirming the disallowance of Rs. 67,000/- on account of mining labour expenses without considering the submission of the assessee.

4.

The assessee craves your indulgence to add amend or alter all or any grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing.”

ITA 559/JP/2018 & C.O. 23/JP/2018_ 3 ACIT, Alwar Vs Shri Subhash Goyal, Jaipur

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

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 Rs. 18,56,700/- which is 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.

ITA 559/JP/2018 & C.O. 23/JP/2018_ 4 ACIT, Alwar Vs Shri Subhash Goyal, Jaipur

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

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.

ITA 559/JP/2018 & C.O. 23/JP/2018_ 5 ACIT, Alwar Vs Shri Subhash Goyal, Jaipur

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 ACIT, Circle-2, Alwar 2. izR;FkhZ@The Respondent- Shri Subhash Goyal, 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. 559/JP/2018 & CO 23/JP/2018) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,

सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेज. त्महपेजतंत

More judgments on Section 268A(1)

All 190 judgments and leading authorities on Section 268A(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →