ITO, Hubli v. Sri Suresh S. Gaikwad, Hubli

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH A BEFORE DR. O.K NARAYANAN VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOS.576 & 5 78/BANG/2009 (ASST. YEARS - 20 03-04 & 2005-06) THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER WARD-3(2) HUBLI. . . APPELLANT VS. SHRI SURESH S GAIKWAD SM-423 INDUSTRIAL ESTATE GOKUL ROAD HUBLI. . RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SMT. JACINTA ZIMIK VASHAI ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-T AX RESPONDENT BY : NONE O R D E R PER DR. O.K NARAYANAN VICE PRESIDENT THESE TWO APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE REVENUE. THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEARS ARE 2003-04 AND 2005-06. THESE APP EALS ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AT HUBLI DATED 18 /02/2009 AND THESE APPEALS ARISE OUT OF THE ASSESSMENT COMPLETED U/S 1 43(3) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT 1961. ITA NOS.576 & 578/B/09 2 2. THE GROUND RAISED FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003- 04 RELATED TO THE DISPUTE OFFERING OF INCOME TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 1 01 200/- MADE IN THE COURSE OF SURVEY AND ALSO RELATING TO THE DISAL LOWANCE OF EXPENDITURE. FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 ALSO T HE GROUNDS RELATES ON SIMILAR LINES. 3. FOR BOTH THE ASSESSMENTS THE TAX INVOLVED IS LE SS THAN RS.2 LAKHS EACH. THE BOARD ISSUED INSTRUCTIONS THAT APP EAL SHOULD NOT BE FILED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL IF THE REVENUE EFFECT IS LESS THAN RS.2 LAKH. IT HAS BEEN HELD IN THE FOLLOWING CASES SUCH INSTRUCTI ONS OF THE BOARD ARE BINDING ON THE REVENUE. 1) CIT VS. CAMCO COLOUR COMPANY 254 ITR 565 2) CWT VS. MOHAN MURARI SAVANTH 191 CTR 497 MP 3) CWT VS. S.S ANNAMALI 258 VS. 675 MAD 4) CIT VS ASHIMKUMAR AGGARWAL 275 ITR 48 JHARKAND 5) DCIT VS. N.B SYED JAFFAR ALI KHAN 94 ITD 21 6) CIT VS. PITWA ENGINEERING WORKS 276 ITR 519 BOM 7) ITAT VS. ROOPCHAND JAIN 79 TTJ 406 NAGPUR ITA NOS.576 & 578/B/09 3 8) CIT VS. BHAGVAN CLOTH STORE 170 TAXATION 503 MP 9) CIT VS. PRADEEP KUMAR GUPTA 207 CTR 115 DEL 10) ACIT VS. RAJOO ENGRS. LTD. 100 ITD 555 11) JCIT VS. PEERLESS DEVELOPERS LTD. 287 ITR 153 AT (SPL. BENCH) KOLKATTA 4. WE ALSO AWARE THAT RAJASHTAN HIGH COURT IN THE CASE REPORTED AT 258 ITR 300 ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT REPORTED AT 26 9 ITR 133 AND P & H HIGH COURT IN THE CASE REPORTED AT 268 ITR 220 HAVE HELD THAT SUCH INSTRUCTIONS OF THE BOARD ARE NOT BINDING AND APPEALS CAN BE ADMITTED EVEN IF THE TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN LIMIT PRESCRIBED BY THE BOARD. HOWEVER LOOKING TO THE JUDGMENTS GIVEN BY A LARGE NUMBER OF HIGH COURTS AND OF THE SPECIAL BENCH IT IS HELD THAT THE APPEAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE IN CASE TAX EFFECT IS LESS THEN RS .2 LAKHS. HENCE ON THIS GROUND ALSO APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS NOT MAINT AINABLE. 5. WHILE TREATING THESE APPEALS LIABLE TO BE DISMIS SED IN LIMINE WE HAVE ALSO APPLIED OUR MIND TO SEE WHETHER ANY QUEST ION OF LAW ARISES IN THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE. BUT WE FIND NO SUCH GROUND RELATING TO LAW OR FOR THAT MATTER ANY MATERIAL ASP ECT RELATING TO ITA NOS.576 & 578/B/09 4 ADMINISTRATION OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT. THE GROUND R ELATES TO JUST QUANTUM OF ADDITION. IN RESULT THE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE ARE DI SMISSED IN LIMINE. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON TUESDAY THE 20TH DAY OF APRIL 2010 AT BANGALORE. SD/- SD/- (SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV) (DR. O .K NARAYANAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PR ESIDENT VMS. COPY TO : 1. THE ASSESSEE 2. THE REVENUE 3.THE CIT CONCERNED. 4.THE CIT(A) CONCERNED. 5.DR 6.GF 7..GF ITAT NEW DELHI. BY ORD ER ASST. REGISTRAR ITAT BANGALOR E.