INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, KISHANGARH vs. SMT. PARUL JAIN, MADANGANJ-KISHANGARH

PDF · subscribers
ITA 743/JPR/2018Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 August 2018AY 2014-154 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the tax effect in the Revenue's appeal was below the threshold limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 3/2018. Therefore, the appeal was not maintainable.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s deletion of additions made under Section 68 and Section 69C of the Income Tax Act. The additions were related to bogus LTCG claims and commission payments.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable before the ITAT when the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limit set by the CBDT.

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. 743/JP/2018

Hearing: 06/08/2018Pronounced: 07/08/2018

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. 743/JP/2018 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2014-15 cuke Income- Tax Officer Smt. Parul Jain, Rajvilla, Vs. Ward-2, Kishangarh Opp. Ravindra Rangmanch, Jain Colony, Madanganj, Kishangarh LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ABUPJ0144K 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 : 06/08/2018 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement : 07/08/2018 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 28.03.2018 for Assessment Year 2014-15 wherein the Revenue has taken the following grounds of appeal:-

“On facts and in law, the Ld CIT(A), Ajmer erred in:-

1.

deleting the addition of Rs. 45,15,529/- 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. 90,311/- made u/s 69C of the I.T. Act for

2 ITA No. 743/JP/2018 ITO, Ward-2, KIshangarh vs. Smt. Parul Jain, Rajvilla, Kishangarh commission payment, without appreciating the facts of the case 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 in listed companies controlled by Shri Praveen Kumar Agarwal who accepted on oath that he was indulged in providing bogus LTCG/STCL entries and M/s PS IT Infrastructure & Services Limited was one of the beneficiaries. The Director of M/s PS IT Infrastructure & Services Limited also admitted that this company is a paper company.”

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 17,68,380/-

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

3 ITA No. 743/JP/2018 ITO, Ward-2, KIshangarh vs. Smt. Parul Jain, Rajvilla, Kishangarh 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.

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 07/08/2018. 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:- 07/08/2018 *Ganesh Kr. आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू

4 ITA No. 743/JP/2018 ITO, Ward-2, KIshangarh vs. Smt. Parul Jain, Rajvilla, Kishangarh 1. vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- Income Tax Officer, Kishangarh 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- Smt. Parul Jain, Kishangarh 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. 743/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 →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →