DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7, JAIPUR vs. M/S. GUPTA K.N. CONSTRUCTION, JAIPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 748/JPR/2018Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 August 2018AY 2012-133 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal observed that the tax effect in the appeal was below the Rs. 20 lacs limit set by CBDT Circular No. 3/2018. Therefore, the appeal was not maintainable.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the deletion of penalty by the CIT(A). The tax effect involved in the appeal was below the threshold limit prescribed by the CBDT circular.

What were the issues?

Whether the departmental appeal is maintainable when the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limit by the CBDT circular.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c),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. 748/JP/2018

Hearing: 07/08/2018Pronounced: 08/08/2018

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. 748/JP/2018 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2012-13 cuke The DCIT, M/s Gupta K. N. Vs. Circle-07, Construction, D-50, Chomu Jaipur House, C-Scheme, Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AADFG4615N vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by: Shri J. C. Kulhari (JCIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : None lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 07/08/2018 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement : 08/08/2018 vkns'k@ ORDER

PER: VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M.

This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the order of ld. CIT (A)- 3, Jaipur dated 26.03.2018 for Assessment Year 2012-13 wherein the Revenue has taken the following grounds of appeal:-

1.

When the assessee deliberately refuses to produce its books of accounts and supporting bills and vouchers, mandatorily required to be maintained by it as per law, in spite of several opportunities to do so, thereby preventing the AO from determining its correct income and pushing him to estimate the assessed income by default, as part of its self serving strategy, can the penalty u/s 271(1) (c) be deleted?

2 ITA No. 748/JP/2018 The DCIT, Circle-07, Jaipur vs. Ms Gupta K. N. Construction, Jaipur

2.

On the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in deleting the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) by relying on judicial pronouncement of cases wherein the facts are completely distinct from the facts of the case of the assessee.”

2.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee. The ld. D/R has submitted

that the tax effect involved in the Revenue’s appeal comes to Rs 11,03,380/-

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 the ld DR 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 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.

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

not exceeding than 20 lacs should be either withdrawn or not pressed by the

departmental representatives.

3 ITA No. 748/JP/2018 The DCIT, Circle-07, Jaipur vs. Ms Gupta K. N. Construction, Jaipur 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 08/08/2018

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:- 08/08/2018 *Ganesh Kr. आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू 1. vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- The DCIT, Circle-07, Jaipur 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- M/s Gupta K. N. Construction, 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. 748/JP/2018} vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order, सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेज. त्महपेजतंत

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →