Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘B’, NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI H.S. SIDHU & SHRI L.P. SAHU
This appeal by the Department is directed against the Order dated 1.11.2010 of Ld. CIT(A)-IV, New Delhi pertaining to assessment year 2006-07 on the following grounds:-
The Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in deleting addition Of Rs. 18,32,264/- made u/s 68 of the IT Act, 1961 on account of unexplained cash credits ignoring that the assessee company failed to discharge its primary onus to prove the creditworthiness of the said lender.
2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in deleting addition of Rs. 10,00,000/- made on account of share application money and Rs. 1,00,000/- on account of share capital Ignoring that the assessee company failed to produce the share holders/applicants for verification and genuineness of its claim. 3. The observations made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Orissa Corporation Pvt Ltd (1986) 156 ITR 78 (SC) were made in the context of the facts of the 'case and cannot be said to have laid down any blinding principal of law under Article 141 of the Constitution as also stated in the observations of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Gujarat State Cooperative Bank Ltd. vs CIT (2001) 167 CTR (Guj.) 34 (2001) 250 ITR 229 (Guj.).
The Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in deleting addition of Rs. 3,54,585/- made on account of commission on sale ignoring that the assessee company failed to produce any supporting document and the commission agent.
5. The appellant craves leave for reserving the right to amend, modify, alter, add or forego any ground(s) of appeal at any time before or during the hearing of this appeal.
In this case, Notice of hearing to the assessee was sent by the Registered AD post, in spite of the same, assessee, nor its authorized representative appeared to prosecute the matter in dispute, nor filed any application for adjournment. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case and the issue involved in the present Appeal, we are of the view that no useful purpose would be served to issue notice again and again to the assessee, therefore, we are deciding the present appeal exparte qua assessee, after hearing the Ld. DR and perusing the records.
We find that Revenue in the Grounds of Appeal before the Tribunal has challenged the deletion of additions of Rs. 18,32,264/- vide ground no. 1, Rs. 10,00,000/- & Rs. 1,00,000/- vide ground no. 2 and Rs. 3,54,585/- vide ground no. 3, hence, the tax effect in the Revenue’s Appeal is less than Rs.10,00,000/-, therefore, the Department’s Appeal is not maintainable, in view of the Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10th December, 2015 issued vide F.No.
279/Misc. 142/2007-ITJ (Pt.) by the CBDT. For the sake of convenience, the relevant para nos. 3 & 10 of the aforesaid CBDT’s Circular are reproduced as under:-
“3. Henceforth, appeals/ SLPs shall not be filed in cases where the tax effect does not exceed the monetary limits given hereunder: Monetary Limit S No Appeals in Income-tax matters (in Rs) 1 Before Appellate Tribunal 10,00,000/- 2 Before High Court 20,00,000/- 3 Before Supreme Court 25,00,000/-
It is clarified that an appeal should not be filed merely because the tax effect in a case exceeds the monetary limits prescribed above. Filing of appeal in such cases is to be decided on merits of the case.
This instruction will apply retrospectively to pending appeals and appeals to be filed henceforth in High Courts/ Tribunals. Pending appeals below the specified tax limits in para 3 above may be withdrawn/ not pressed. Appeals before the Supreme Court will be governed by the instructions on this subject, operative at the time when such appeal was filed.” 4. It is not in dispute that the Board’s instruction or directions issued to the income-tax authorities are binding on those authorities, therefore, the Department should have withdrawn/ not pressed the present Appeal, in view of the aforesaid instructions since the tax effect in the instant Appeal is less than the amount of Rs. 10 lacs, prescribed in the above said CBDT’s Instructions.
5. Keeping in view the CBDT Instruction No. 21/2015 dated 10th December, 2015, we are of the view that the Revenue should have withdrawn/ not pressed the instant appeal before the Tribunal. We are also of the view that the said Instructions are applicable for the pending appeals and appeals to be filed henceforth in Tribunal. Accordingly, the Revenue’s Appeal is dismissed.
In the result, Appeal filed by the Revenue Stands dismissed.
Order pronounced in the Open Court on 02/02/2017.