The Income-tax Officer,, Muktsar v. Sh. Balbir Singh, Distt. Muktsar.

ITA 20/ASR/2014 | 1999-2000
Pronouncement Date: 24-11-2014 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 2020914 RSA 2014
Bench Amritsar
Appeal Number ITA 20/ASR/2014
Duration Of Justice 10 month(s) 15 day(s)
Appellant The Income-tax Officer,, Muktsar
Respondent Sh. Balbir Singh, Distt. Muktsar.
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 24-11-2014
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted SMC
Tribunal Order Date 24-11-2014
Date Of Final Hearing 13-11-2014
Next Hearing Date 13-11-2014
Assessment Year 1999-2000
Appeal Filed On 09-01-2014
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. A.D. JAIN JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. B.P. JAIN ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NOS. 17 18 19 & 20 (ASR)/2014 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 1996-97 TO 1999-2000 PAN: INCOME TAX OFFICER VS. SH. BALBIR SINGH WARD-II(2) MUKTSAR S/O-MOHINDER SINGH VPO : BHAGSAR DISTT: MUKTSAR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) DEPARTMENT BY: SH. TARSEM LAL DR ASSESSEE BY: SH. P.N. ARORA ADVOCATE DATE OF HEARING: 13.11.2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 24.11.2014 ORDER PER BENCH 1. THESE FOUR APPEALS OF THE REVENUE ARISES FROM A C ONSOLIDATED ORDER OF CIT(A) BATHINDA DATED 01.10.2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1996-97 TO 1999-2000. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED IDENTICAL GROUNDS OF APP EAL IN ALL THE YEARS EXCEPT THE MENTION OF ASSESSMENT YEAR IN GRO UND NO. 1IN EACH YEAR. FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE WE REPRODUCE GROUNDS O F APPEAL FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1996-97 HEREIN BELOW: I. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LEA RNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN ALLOWING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE BY HOL DING THAT THE 2 I.T.A. NOS. 17 18 19 & 20 (ASR)/2014 NOTICE U/S 148 WAS ISSUED TO THE APPELLANT IN INDI VIDUAL STATUS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1996-1997 WERE BARRED BY TIME A S THESE WERE ISSUED AFTER THE TIME PRESCRIBED U/S 149(1) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 WHICH ELAPSED AT THE END OF SIX YEARS FROM TH E RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR. II. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED BY HOLDING THAT SINCE THE A.O. ISSUED NOTICE U/S 148 ON THE BASIS OF DIRECTIONS OF THE CI T THERE IS NO APPLICATION OF MIND ON ACCOUNT OF WHICH PROCEEDINGS INITIATED U/S 148 IS BAD IN LAW. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ALSO ER RED BY HOLDING THAT THE RESORT TO SECTION 150(1) CAN ONLY BE TAKEN FOR MAKING ASSESSMENT OR REASSESSMENT TO GIVE EFFECT TO ANY FI NDING OR DIRECTION PURSUANT TO ANY APPELLATE ORDER PASSED BY THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY WHERE THE PROCEEDINGS RELATES TO THE SAME ASSESSEE ARE SQUARELY APPLICABLE TO THE CASE OF APPELLANT. III. IN THIS CASE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX HAS DIR ECTED THE A.O. TO INITIATE PROCEEDINGS IN THE CORRECT STATUS WHERE VER REQUIRED AS THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS GIVEN LIBERTY TO A.O. AS PE R HIS APPELLATE ORDER DATED 23.10.2008. WHILE DECIDING THE APPEAL O F THE ASSESSEE THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS HELD THAT A.O. IS AT LIBERTY TO ASSESS THE CORRECT INCOME IN THE HANDS OF THE APPELLANT/CO-PAR CENERS AS PER PROVISION OF LAW. THEREFORE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 1 48 OF THE I.T. ACT WAS ISSUED ON THE DIRECTIONS OF THE CIT AS PER CIT(A)S APPEAL ORDER DATED 23.10.2008 AND ALSO WITH APPROVAL OF TH E COMPETENT AUTHORITY. IV. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD AND AMEND ANY GRO UND OF APPEAL BEFORE THE APPEAL IS FINALLY HEARD OR DISPOSED OFF. 3. LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SH. P.N. ARORA ADVOCATE RAISED PRELIMINARY OBJECTION AND PLACED ON RECORD T HE INSTRUCTION NO. 3/2011 DATED 09.02.2011 OF THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DI RECT TAXES AND SUBMITTED THAT THE SAID APPEALS ARE NOT MAINTAINABL E AND CANNOT BE FILED BY THE REVENUE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL SINCE THE TAX EF FECT IN ALL THE YEARS SEPARATELY IS LESS THAN RS. 3 LACS AS PER THE COMP UTATION OF TAX FOR EACH YEAR PLACED ON RECORD. THE LEARNED DR SH. TARSEM L AL (J.C.I.T.) WAS NOT 3 I.T.A. NOS. 17 18 19 & 20 (ASR)/2014 ABLE TO REFUTE THESE INSTRUCTIONS. THE SAID INSTRUC TIONS OF THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES MENTIONED HEREINABOVE ARE R EPRODUCED FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE AS UNDER: INSTRUCTION NO. 3/2011 [F. NO. 279/MISC. 142/2007- TTJ] DATED 09.02.2011 REFERENCE IS INVITED TO BOARDS INSTRUCTION NO. 5/2008 DATED 15.05.2008 WHEREIN MONETARY LIMITS AND OTHER CONDITIONS FOR FI LING DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS (IN INCOME-TAX MATTERS) BEFORE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HIGH COURTS AND SUPREME COURT WERE SPECIFIED. 2. IN SUPERSESSION OF THE ABOVE INSTRUCTION IT HAS BEEN DECIDED BY THE BOARD THAT DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS MAY BE FILED ON MER ITS BEFORE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HIGH COURTS AND SUPREME COURT KEEPING IN VIEW THE MONETARY LIMITS AND CONDITIONS SPECIFIED BELOW. 3. HENCEFORTH APPEALS SHALL NOT BE FILED IN CASES WHERE THE TAX EFFECT DOES NOT EXCEED THE MONETARY LIMITS GIVEN HEREUNDER :- S. NO. APPEALS IN INCOME-TAX MATTERS MONETARY LIM IT(IN RS.) 1. APPEAL BEFORE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 3 00 000/- 2. APPEAL U/S 260A BEFORE HIGH COURT 10 00 000/- 3. APPEAL BEFORE SUPREME COURT 25 00 000/- IT IS CLARIFIED THAT AN APPEAL SHOULD NOT BE FIL ED MERELY BECAUSE THE TAX EFFECT IN A CASE EXCEEDS THE MONETARY LIMIT S PRESCRIBED ABOVE. FILING OF APPEAL IN SUCH CASES IS TO BE DECIDED ON MERITS OF THE CASE. 4. FOR THIS PURPOSE TAX EFFECT MEANS THE DIFFER ENCE BETWEEN THE TAX ON THE TOTAL INCOME ASSESSED AND THE TAX THAT WOULD HA VE BEEN CHARGEABLE HAD SUCH TOTAL INCOME BEEN REDUCED BY THE AMOUNT OF INCOME IN RESPECT OF THE ISSUES AGAINST WHICH APPEAL IS INTENDED TO B E FILED (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS DISPUTED ISSUES). HOWEVER THE TAX WILL NOT INCLUDE ANY INTEREST THEREON EXCEPT WHERE CHARGEABILITY OF INT EREST ITSELF IS IN DISPUTE. IN CASE THE CHARGEABILITY OF INTEREST IS THE ISSUE UNDER DISPUTE THE AMOUNT OF INTEREST SHALL BE THE TAX EFFECT. IN CASES WHERE RETURNED LOSS IS REDUCED OR ASSESSED AS INCOME THE TAX EFFECT WOULD INCLUDE NOTIONAL TAX ON DISPUTED ADDITIONS. IN CASE OF PENALTY ORDERS THE TAX EFFECT WILL MEAN 4 I.T.A. NOS. 17 18 19 & 20 (ASR)/2014 QUANTUM OF PENALTY DELETED OR REDUCED IN THE ORDER TO BE APPEALED AGAINST. 4. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL CALCULATE THE TAX EFFEC T SEPARATELY FOR EVERY ASSESSMENT YEAR IN RESPECT OF THE DISPUTED ISSUES I N THE CASE OF EVERY ASSESSEE. IF IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE THE DIS PUTED ISSUES ARISE IN MORE THAN ONE ASSESSMENT YEAR APPEAL CAN BE FILED IN R ESPECT OF SUCH ASSESSMENT YEAR OR YEARS IN WHICH THE TAX EFFECT IN RESPECT OF THE DISPUTE ISSUES EXCEEDS THE MONETARY LIMIT SPECIFIED IN PAR A 3. NO APPEAL SHALL BE FILED IN RESPECT OF AN ASSESSMENT YEAR OR YEARS IN WHICH THE TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN THE MONETARY LIMIT SPECIFIED IN PARA 3. I N OTHER WORDS HENCEFORTH APPEAL CAN BE FILED ONLY WITH REFERENCE TO THE TAX EFFECT IN THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR. HOWEVER IN CASE OF A COM POSITE ORDER OF ANY HIGH COURT OR APPELLATE AUTHORITY WHICH INVOLVES M ORE THAN ON ASSESSMENT YEAR AND COMMON ISSUES IN MORE THAN ONE ASSESSMENT YEAR APPEAL SHALL BE FILED IN RESPECT OF ALL SUCH ASSESS MENT YEARS EVEN IF THE TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN THE PRESCRIBED MONETARY L IMITS IN ANY OF THE YEAR(S) IF IT IS DECIDED TO FILE APPEAL IN RESPECT OF THE YEAR(S) IN WHICH TAX EFFECT EXCEEDS THE MONETARY LIMIT PRESCRIBED. IN CASE WHERE A COMPOSITE ORDER/JUDGMENT INVOLVES MORE THAN ON ASSE SSEE EACH ASSESSEE SHALL BE DEALT WITH SEPARATELY. 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE FACTS ON RECORD. 6. THERE IS NO DISPUTE TO THE FACTS THAT IN EACH Y EAR THE TAX ON THE DISPUTED AMOUNT IS LESS THAN RS. 3 LACS. IT IS ALSO A FACT ON RECORD THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS PASSED A CONSOLIDATED ORDER FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 1996-97 TO 1999-2000 I.E. FOR FOUR YEARS AND THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE APPEALS BEFORE ITAT ON 10.01.2014 I.E. AFTER 09.02. 2011. AS PER THE CBDT INSTRUCTION DATED 09.02.2011 REPRODUCED HERE INABOVE THE REVENUE CANNOT FILE THE APPEAL IF THE TAX EFFECT E XCEEDS THE MONETARY LIMITS OF RS. 3 LACS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL IN EACH YE AR. EVEN IN THE CASE OF COMPOSITE ORDER THE ASSESSEE HAS TO BE DEALT SEPAR ATELY FOR EACH YEAR. IN 5 I.T.A. NOS. 17 18 19 & 20 (ASR)/2014 THE CIRCUMSTANCES AND FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE TH E APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE ARE HAVING TAX EFFECT LESS THAN RS. 3 LACS IN EACH YEAR AND ACCORDINGLY APPEALS FOR ALL THE ASSESSMENT YEARS S HOULD NOT HAVE BEEN FILED BECAUSE THE TAX EFFECT DOES NOT EXCEED THE MO NETARY LIMITS MENTIONED HEREINABOVE. ACCORDINGLY IN VIEW OF THE SAID INSTRUCTION MENTIONED HEREIN ABOVE ALL THE APPEALS FILED BY TH E REVENUE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 1996-97 TO 1999-2000 ARE NOT MAINT AINABLE AND ARE DISMISSED. 7. IN THE RESULT THE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 1996-97 TO 1999-2000 ARE DISMISSED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 24 TH NOVEMBER 2014 SD/- SD/- (A.D. JAIN) (B.P. JAIN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 24 TH NOVEMBER 2014 /RK/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE ASSESSEE: SH. BALBIR SINGH S/O- SHRI MOHINDE R SINGH VPO: BHAGSAR DISTT.-MUKTSAR. 2. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-II(2) MUKTSAR. 3. THE CIT(A) 4. THE CIT 5. THE SR DR I.T.A.T. TRUE COPY BY ORDER (ASSISTANT REGISTRAR) INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH: AMRITSAR.