Income-tax Officer,, Hardoi v. Shri Prakash Nath Verma, Hardoi

ITA 306/LKW/2013 | 2002-2003
Pronouncement Date: 24-07-2013 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 30623714 RSA 2013
Assessee PAN AENPV8656K
Bench Lucknow
Appeal Number ITA 306/LKW/2013
Duration Of Justice 2 month(s) 23 day(s)
Appellant Income-tax Officer,, Hardoi
Respondent Shri Prakash Nath Verma, Hardoi
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 24-07-2013
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted SMC
Tribunal Order Date 24-07-2013
Date Of Final Hearing 13-06-2013
Next Hearing Date 13-06-2013
Assessment Year 2002-2003
Appeal Filed On 01-05-2013
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH SMC : LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NOS.306 TO 309/LKW/2013 ASSESSMENT YEARS:2002 - 03 TO 2005 - 06 INCOME TAX OFFICER VS. SHRI PRAKASH NATH VERMA HARDOI. BHAGWANT NAGAR HARDOI. PAN:AENPV8656K (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) C.O. NOS.06 TO 09/LKW/2013 (IN I.T.A. NOS.306 TO 309/LKW/2013) ASSESSMENT YEARS:2002 - 03 TO 2005 - 06 SHRI PRAKASH NATH VERMA VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER HARDOI. HARDOI. (OBJECTOR) (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : SHRI ALOK MITRA D.R. ASSESSEE BY : SHRI SANJAY SAXENA F.C.A. DATE OF HEARING : 13 /0 6 /2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 24/07/2013 ORDER THESE APPEALS ARE PREFERRED ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) ON COMMON GROUNDS WHICH ARE AS UNDER: 1 . THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) BAREILLY HAS ERRED IN LAW AND FACTS IN QUASHING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER HOLDING ACTION UNDER SECTION 147 AS INVALID PLACING RELIANCE ON VARIOUS CASE LAWS OF HON'BLE HIGH COURT WHICH IS NOT CORRECT BECAUSE FOR TAKING ACTION UNDER SECTION 147 OF THE I.T.ACT 1961 ONLY CAUSE OR 2 JUSTIFICATION OF ASSESSING OFFICER IS REQUIRED AS PER CASE LAWS OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF RAJESH JHAVERI STOCK BROKERS (P) LTD. (2007) 210 CTR (SC) 30; (2007) 291 ITR 500 (SC) AND AGR INVESTMENT LIMITED VS. ADDL. C OMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX AND ANR (2011) 239 CTGR(DEL) 378; (2011) 333 ITR 146; (2011) 197 TAXMAN 177; (2011) 50 DTR 97. 2. T HE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX(APPEALS) BAREILLY MAY BE CANCELLED AND THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER MAY BE R ESTORED. 2. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT TAX EFFECT IN TH ESE APPEAL S IS LESS THAN THE PRESCRIBED LIMIT SO THE DEPARTMENT OUGHT NOT TO HAVE FILED TH ESE APPEAL S IN VIEW OF THE INSTRUCTIONS ISSUED BY C.B.D.T. 3. THE LEARNED D. R. DID NOT CONTROVERT THE ABOVE FACT. 4. FROM CAREFUL PERUSAL OF THE RECORD S I FIND THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN THESE APPEALS IS LESS THAN THE LIMIT PRESCRIBED BY THE CBDT. SECTION 268A HAS BEEN INSERTED BY THE FINANCE ACT 2008 WITH RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT FROM 01/04/99. THE PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN SECTION 268A READ AS UNDER: 268A. (1) THE BOARD MAY FROM TIME TO TIME ISSUE ORDERS INSTRUCTIONS OR DIRECTIONS TO OTHER INCOME - TAX AUTHORITI ES FIXING SUCH MONETARY LIMITS AS IT MAY DEEM FIT FOR THE PURPOSE OF REGULATING FILING OF APPEAL OR APPLICATION FOR REFERENCE BY ANY INCOME - TAX AUTHORITY UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THIS CHAPTER. (2) WHERE IN PURSUANCE OF THE ORDERS INSTRUCTIONS OR DIRECTIONS ISSUED UNDER SUB - SECTION (1) AN INCOME - TAX AUTHORITY HAS NOT FILED ANY APPEAL OR APPLICATION FOR REFERENCE ON ANY ISSUE IN THE CASE OF AN ASSESSEE FOR ANY ASSESSMENT YEAR IT SHALL NOT PRECLUDE SUCH AUTHORITY FROM FILING AN APPEAL OR APPLICATIO N FOR REFERENCE ON THE SAME ISSUE IN THE CASE OF 3 ( A ) THE SAME ASSESSEE FOR ANY OTHER ASSESSMENT YEAR; OR ( B ) ANY OTHER ASSESSEE FOR THE SAME OR ANY OTHER ASSESSMENT YEAR. (3) NOTWITHSTANDING THAT NO APPEAL OR APPLICATION FOR REFERENCE HAS BEEN FILED BY AN INC OME - TAX AUTHORITY PURSUANT TO THE ORDERS OR INSTRUCTIONS OR DIRECTIONS ISSUED UNDER SUB - SECTION (1) IT SHALL NOT BE LAWFUL FOR AN ASSESSEE BEING A PARTY IN ANY APPEAL OR REFERENCE TO CONTEND THAT THE INCOME - TAX AUTHORITY HAS ACQUIESCED IN THE DECISION O N THE DISPUTED ISSUE BY NOT FILING AN APPEAL OR APPLICATION FOR REFERENCE IN ANY CASE. (4) THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL OR COURT HEARING SUCH APPEAL OR REFERENCE SHALL HAVE REGARD TO THE ORDERS INSTRUCTIONS OR DIRECTIONS ISSUED UNDER SUB - SECTION (1) AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH SUCH APPEAL OR APPLICATION FOR REFERENCE WAS FILED OR N OT FILED IN RESPECT OF ANY CASE. (5) EVERY ORDER INSTRUCTION OR DIRECTION WHICH HAS BEEN ISSUED BY THE BOARD FIXING MONETARY LIMITS FOR FILING AN APPEAL OR APPLICATION FOR R EFERENCE SHALL BE DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN ISSUED UNDER SUB - SECTION (1) AND THE PROVISIONS OF SUB - SECTIONS (2) (3) AND (4) SHALL APPLY ACCORDINGLY. ] 5. IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE THAT THE BOARDS INSTRUCTION OR DIRECTIONS ISSUED TO THE INCOME - TAX AUTHORITIES ARE BINDING ON THOSE AUTHORITIES THEREFORE THE DEPARTMENT OUGHT NOT TO HAVE FILED THE SE APPEAL S IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE MENTIONED SECTION 268A SINCE THE TAX EFFECT IN THE SE APPEALS IS LESS THAN THE AMOUNT PRESCRIBED FOR NOT FILING THE APPEAL SO TH ESE APPEAL S ARE DISMISSED. 6. IN THE CROSS OBJECTIONS THE ASSESSEE HAS REITERATED HIS CONTENTIONS THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN THE APPEALS OF THE DEPARTMENT IS LESS THAN THE LIMITED 4 PRESCRIBED BY THE CBDT FOR NOT FILING THE APPEAL THEREFORE THE DEPARTMENT OUGHT NOT TO HAV E FILED THESE APPEALS. SINCE THE APPEALS OF THE DEPARTMENT HAVE BEEN DISMISSED THE CROSS OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE HAVE BECOME INFRUCTUOUS . ACCORDINGLY THE CROSS OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. 7. IN THE RESULT THE APPEALS OF T HE DEPARTMENT AS WELL AS THE CROSS OBJECTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 24/07/2013 ) SD/. (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 24/07/2013 *CL SINGH COPY FORWARDED TO THE: 1. APPELLANT. 2. RESPONDENT. 3. CIT (A) 4. CIT 5. DR. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR