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. 97/JP/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. 97/JP/2018 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2008-09 cuke Deputy Commissioner of Sh. Harsh Vardhan Johari, Vs. Income-tax, Central Circle-03, T-02, Pallvi Apartment, Jaipur Opp. Laxmi Vilas Hotel, Tonk Road, Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AFVPJ2660R vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by: Shri Varindar Mehta (CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Smt. Juhi lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 21/08/2018 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement : 21/08/2018 vkns'k@ ORDER
PER: VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M.
This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the order of ld. CIT (A)- 04, Jaipur dated 03.11.2017 for Assessment Year 2008-09 wherein the Revenue has taken the following grounds of appeal:- “1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,00,000/- in view of decision of Jai Steel Limited vs. ACIT (88 DTR 1) (Raj. HC), Kabul Chawla vs. ACIT 380 ITR 573 (Del HC) & Soumya Construction PL vs. CIT 387 ITR 529 without considering the fact that seized material related to the year under consideration was
2 ITA No. 97/JP/2018 DCIT, Central Circle-03, Jaipur vs. Sh. Harsh Vardhan Johari, Jaipur found during the search proceedings and also mentioned in the assessment order.”
Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 45,00,000/- in view of decision of Jai Steel Limited vs. ACIT (88 DTR HC) & Soumya Construction PL vs. CIT 387 ITR 529 without considering the fact that seized material related to the year under consideration the fact that seized material related to the year under consideration was found during the search proceedings and also mentioned in the assessment order.”
The ld. D/R has submitted that the tax effect involved in the Revenue’s
appeal is 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 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.
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. 97/JP/2018 DCIT, Central Circle-03, Jaipur vs. Sh. Harsh Vardhan Johari, Jaipur 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 21/08/2018. 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:- 21/08/2018 *Ganesh Kr. आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू 1. vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- DCIT, Jaipur 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- Sh. Harsh Vardhan 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. 97/JP/2018} vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order, सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेज. त्महपेजतंत