The ITO, Ward-2,, Patan v. Shri Govindbhai Bachanddas Patel, Patan

ITA 1461/AHD/2010 | 2006-2007
Pronouncement Date: 30-07-2010 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 146120514 RSA 2010
Assessee PAN AAEFP0448H
Bench Ahmedabad
Appeal Number ITA 1461/AHD/2010
Duration Of Justice 2 month(s) 25 day(s)
Appellant The ITO, Ward-2,, Patan
Respondent Shri Govindbhai Bachanddas Patel, Patan
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 30-07-2010
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted SMC
Tribunal Order Date 30-07-2010
Assessment Year 2006-2007
Appeal Filed On 05-05-2010
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT AHMEDABAD AHMEDABAD SMC BENCH (BEFORE S/SHRI G.D. AGARWAL VICE-PRESIDENT) ITA.NO.1461/AHD/2010 ASSTT.YEAR : 2006-2007 ITO WARD-2 PATAN. VS. SHRI GOVINDBHAI BALCHANDAS PATEL 51 NEW MARKET YARD UNJHA. PAN : AAEFP 0448H (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : SHRI R.K.DHANESTA ASSESSEE BY : SHRI BANDISH SOPARKAR O R D E R PER G.D. AGARWAL VICE-PRESIDENT: THIS IS REVENUES APPEAL AGAINST ORDER OF THE CIT(A) GANDHINAGAR DATED 12.0 2.2010 IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.27 120/- . 2. AT THE OUT SET THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSE SSEE RAISED PRELIMINARY OBJECTION AS TO THE MAINTAINABILITY OF THE APPEAL IN VIEW OF RECENT CBDT CIRCULAR RESTRICTING FILING OF APPEAL BY THE REVENU E. LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE CONTENDS THAT IN VIEW OF THE VARIOUS INSTR UCTIONS OF THE CBDT RESTRICTING THE FILING OF APPEALS BEFORE THE APPELL ATE TRIBUNALS HIGH COURTS AND SUPREME COURT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE SHOU LD BE DISMISSED IN LIMINE . 3. I FIND THAT THE ITAT IS TAKING CONSISTENT VIEW O N THE ISSUE OF ADMISSIBILITY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IN THE LIGHT OF VARIOUS INSTRUCTIONS ISSUED BY CBDT FROM TIME TO TIME VIZ. INSTRUCTION NO.1979 DATED 27-3-2000 NO.1985 DATED 29-6-2000 NO.6 OF 2003 DATED 17-70-2 003 NO.19 OF 2003 DATED 23-12-2003 NO.5/2004 DATED 27-5-2004 NO.2/2 005 DATED 24-10-2005 AND NO.5/2007 DATED 16-7-2007 AND LASTLY INSTRUCTIO N NO.F.NO.279/MISC.142/2007-IT DATED 15-5-2008 WHEREI N MONETARY LIMITS FOR ITA.NO.1461/AHD/2010 -2- FILING DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS (INCOME-TAX MATTERS) AN D OTHER CONDITIONS WERE SPECIFIED RESTRICTING FILING APPEALS BEFORE APPELL ATE TRIBUNALS HIGH COURTS AND SUPREME COURT. THE COORDINATE BENCH OF ITAT R AJKOT IN THE CASE OF ACIT VS. RAJOO ENGINEERS LTD.[2006] 100 ITD 555 WH EREIN THE HON'BLE BENCH HAS DISMISSED THE REVENUES APPEAL BY HOLDING AS UN DER (HEAD NOTES):- IT IS TRUE THAT THE HIGH COURT DECISION IN COMMISS IONER OF INCOME-TAX V. PITHWA ENGG. WORKS [2005] 276 ITR 519 WAS NOT DEAL ING WITH THE NEW LIMIT OF THE CIRCULAR DATED 24-10-2005. IT WAS WITH REFE RENCE TO THE EARLIER CIRCULAR WHERE REFERENCE WAS NOT REQUIRED TO BE FILED TO THE HIGH COURT IF THE TAX EFFECT WAS LESS THAN RS.2 LAKHS. THE CONTENTION OF THE RE VENUE IN THAT CASE WAS THAT RS.2 LAKHS LIMIT WAS INCREASED BY CIRCULAR DATED 27 -3-2000 AND PRIOR TO THAT THE LIMIT WAS ONLY RS.50 000/- AND THE CONTENTION O F THE REVENUE WAS THAT THE NEW LIMIT WOULD NOT BE APPLICABLE TO THE OLD REFERE NCES. THE HIGH COURT REJECTED THE SAID CONTENTION OF THE REVENUE. [PARAG RAPH 4]. IN THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES THOUGH THE SAID HIGH COURT DECISION DID NOT DEAL WITH THE CIRCULAR DATED 24-10-2005 BUT IT HAD DEALT WIT H THE EARLIER CIRCULAR AND THE LIMITS OF THAT CIRCULAR WERE APPLIED EVEN TO TH E CASES WHICH WERE PRIOR TO THE OLD CIRCULAR. THEREFORE THE RATIO OF THAT DECI SION WAS APPLICABLE IN THE INSTANT CASE AS WELL. THE CBDT HAS TAKEN A POLICY DECISION NOT TO FILE APPEALS IN SUCH TYPE OF CASES AND THE CIRCULAR IS BINDING O N THE REVENUE EVEN TO APPEALS FILED BEFORE 31-10-2005 AND THE DEPTT.. WOU LD NOT BE JUSTIFIED IN PROCEEDING WITH THOSE APPEALS WITHIN THE MONETARY L IMIT OF TAX EFFECT PRESCRIBED IN THE CIRCULAR DATED 24-10-2005 [PARAGR APH 5] THE CONTENTION OF THE REVENUE THAT THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS COVERED BY THE EXCEPTION 3 HAD ALSO NO FORCE INASMUCH AS THE SAID EXCEPTION PROVIDES THAT THE CBDT HAS ALSO DECIDED THAT IN CASES INVOLVING SUBST ANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW OF IMPORTANCE AS WELL AS IN CASES WHERE THE SAME QUEST ION OF LAW WILL REPEATEDLY ARISE EITHER IN THE CASE CONCERNED OR IN SIMILAR C ASES SHOULD BE SEPARATELY CONSIDERED ON MERITS WITHOUT BEING HINDERED BY THE MONETARY LIMITS [PARAGRAPH 6] ITA.NO.1461/AHD/2010 -3- AS PER THE INSTRUCTION CERTAIN EXCEPTIONS HAVE BEEN PROVIDED FOR AND THEY ARE (A) WHERE THE CONSTITUTIONAL VALIDITY OF THE ACT OR RULE ARE UNDER CHALLENGE (B) WHERE THE BOARDS ORDER NOTIFICATION INSTRUCTION OR CIRCULAR HAS BEEN HELD TO BE ILLEGAL OR ULTRA VIRES OR (C) THE REVENUE AUDIT OBJ ECTION IN THE CASE HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT. NONE OF THESE THREE EX CEPTIONS HAVE BEEN CANVASSED BEFORE ME ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE. I TH EREFORE HOLD THAT THE APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT IS NOT MAINTAINABLE AND DISMISS T HE SAME AS SUCH. 4. IN THE RESULT REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 30 TH JULY 2010. SD/- (G.D. AGARWAL) VICE-PRESIDENT PLACE : AHMEDABAD DATE : 30-07-2010 VK* COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1) : APPELLANT 2) : RESPONDENT 3) : CIT(A) 4) : CIT CONCERNED 5) : DR ITAT. BY ORDER DR ITAT AHMEDABAD