ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. D- ART FURNITURE SYSTEM PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4634/DEL/2016Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 November 2019AY 2005-064 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as it was not pressed by the Revenue and was also not maintainable due to the low tax effect, as per the prevailing CBDT circulars. The Revenue was granted liberty to approach the Tribunal for recall if the appeal was found to be outside the scope of the circulars.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order which had deleted additions made by the AO. During the hearing, it was brought to the Tribunal's notice that the tax effect in the appeal was below the threshold limit set by CBDT circulars for filing appeals.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable given the tax effect and CBDT circulars, and whether the AO's additions were within the scope of Section 153A.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 153A,Section 254(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

(A) This appeal by Revenue is filed against the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-34, Delhi, [“Ld. CIT(A)”, for short], dated 27.06.2016 for Assessment Year 2005-06. Grounds taken in this appeal of Revenue are as under:

“1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in holding that the additions made by the AO were beyond the scope of section 153A, while upholding that the invocation of section 153A was valid. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in holding that the AO could not have proceeded to frame assessment u/s 153A of the Act as no incriminating documents /assets Page 1 of 4 ITA No.- 4634/Del/2016 M/s D-Art Furniture Systems Pvt. Ltd. were found during the search without appreciating that the provision of section 153A of the Act does not stipulate any such conditionality.

3.

On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in deleting all the additions made by the AO on the technical ground without adjudicating the individual additions on merit.

4.

On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A), being a fact finding authority, has erred in facts and in law in allowing the appeal of the assessee without independently verifying the facts of the case, as mandated by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Jansampark Advertising (375 ITR 373) 5. The appellant craves leave to add, amend any/ all the grounds of appeal before or during the course of hearing of the appeal.”

(B) At the outset, Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Departmental Representative) [“Ld. CIT (DR)”, for short] brought to our notice, at the time of hearing that tax effect in this appeal is below Rs. 50,00,000/-. Both sides, [Representatives of Revenue and the Assessee] were in agreement, at the time of hearing before us, that the tax effect in the present appeal is below Rs. 50,00,000/-. Vide recent CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 read with earlier CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018, dated 11.07.2018, minimum threshold limit of tax effect of filing of appeals by Revenue in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (“ITAT”, for short) has been enhanced to Rs. 50,00,000/-. In a subsequent clarification issued by CBDT vide F.No. 279/Misc/M- 93/2018-ITJ, dated 20/08/2019, it has been clarified by CBDT that the aforesaid revised monetary limit is also applicable to all pending appeals in ITAT. Having regard to the aforesaid, the Ld. CIT(DR) for Revenue did not press the appeal. The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee also submitted that the appeal was not maintainable in view of the aforesaid CBDT Circular dated 08.08.2019 and 11.07.2018; and aforesaid clarification dated 20.08.2019 issued by CBDT. Therefore, this appeal is Page 2 of 4

ITA No.- 4634/Del/2016 M/s D-Art Furniture Systems Pvt. Ltd. dismissed being not pressed and also being not maintainable having regard to aforesaid CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 read with aforesaid CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018 in the light of aforesaid clarification dated 20/08/2019.

(C) Before leaving, we clarify that Revenue will be at liberty to approach Income Tax Appellate Tribunal U/s 254(2) of Income Tax Act, 1961 seeking recall of this order and, for restoration of this appeal if it is found that appeal of Revenue is not covered by aforesaid CBDT Circulars dated 08.08.2019 and 11.07.2018.

(D) In the result, this appeal by Revenue is dismissed. Our decision was orally pronounced in the Open Court after conclusion of hearing on the date of hearing. Now, this written order is pronounced in Open Court on 28/11/19.

Sd/- Sd/- (SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA) (ANADEE NATH MISSHRA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 28/11/19 Pooja/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI ITA No.- 4634/Del/2016 M/s D-Art Furniture Systems Pvt. Ltd. Date of dictation

Date on which the typed draft is placed before the dictating Member Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Other Member

Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr. PS/PS

Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr. PS/PS Date on which the final order is uploaded on the website of ITAT

Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk

Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk

More judgments on Section 153A

All 18,957 judgments and leading authorities on Section 153A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →