ITO 11(2)(4), MUMBAI v. LEELA B. PATEL, MUMBAI

ITA 6257/MUM/2010 | 2005-2006
Pronouncement Date: 18-11-2011 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 625719914 RSA 2010
Assessee PAN AGEPP6707D
Bench Mumbai
Appeal Number ITA 6257/MUM/2010
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 29 day(s)
Appellant ITO 11(2)(4), MUMBAI
Respondent LEELA B. PATEL, MUMBAI
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 18-11-2011
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted H
Tribunal Order Date 18-11-2011
Assessment Year 2005-2006
Appeal Filed On 19-08-2010
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH H MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D.K. AGARWAL(JM) & SHRI R.K. PANDA (AM ) I.T.A.NO.6257/MUM/2010 (A.Y. 2005-06) INCOME-TAX OFFICER WARD 11(2)(4) ROOM NO.443 4 TH FLOOR AAYKAR BHAVAN M.K. RD MUMBAI-400 020. VS. MRS. LEELA B. PATIL B/2 GULMOHAR D.G. MAHAJANI PATH SEWRIE MUMBAI-400 015. PAN: AGEPP6707D APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY SHRI GOLI SRINIWAS RAO. RESPONDENT BY SHRI V IMAL PUNMIYA. DATE OF HEARING 14 - 11 - 2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 18 - 11 - 2011 O R D E R PER D.K. AGARWAL JM : THIS APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AG AINST THE ORDER DATED 17-05-2010 BY THE LD. CIT(A) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEA R 2005-06. 2. THE GROUNDS TAKEN BY THE REVENUE READ AS UNDER : 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AN D IN LAW ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.7 00 000/ - MADE BY THE A.O. AND HOLDING THAT THE INVESTMENT DI D NOT PERTAIN TO THE ASSTT. YR. 2005-06 BY ADMITTING ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES OF FIXED DEPOSITS IN CONTRAVE NTION TO RULE 46A. THE LD. CIT(A) SHOULD HAVE GIVEN THE ASSESSING OFFICER AN OPPORTUNITY TO VERIFY THE NEW EVIDENCE PRODUCED. ITA NO. 6257/M/10 MRS. LEELA B. PATIL. 2 2. THE APPELLANT PRAYS THAT THE ORDER OF CIT(A) ON THE ABOVE GROUND BE SET ASIDE AND THAT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER BE RESTORED. 3. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO AMEND OR ALTER ANY GROUNDS OR ADD A NEW GROUND IF NECESSARY. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING IT WAS OBSERVED THAT THE TAX EFFECT ON THE ABOVE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS LESS THAN THE MONETA RY LIMIT OF RS.3.00 LAKHS FIXED BY THE CBDT. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE DI D NOT DISPUTE ON THE SAID FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE. 4. THAT BEING SO AND IN VIEW OF THE RECENT CBDT INS TRUCTION NO.3 OF 2011 DATED 9 TH FEBRUARY 2011 REPORTED IN (2011) 332 ITR 1 (STAT UTES) AND THE RATIO OF THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MADHUKAR K. INAMDAR (HUF) (2009) 318 ITR 148 (BOM) WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT THE REVISED MONETARY LIMIT IN THE CIRCULA R DATED MAY 15 2008 WOULD BE APPLICABLE FOR ALL PENDING APPEALS AND ALSO KEEPING IN VIEW THE CONSISTENT VIEW OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCHES OF THE TRIBUNAL WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE DEPARTMENT SHOULD NOT HAVE FILED THE APPEAL AND ACCORDINGLY THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 5. IN THE RESULT THE REVENUES APPEAL STANDS DISMI SSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 18TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2011. SD/- SD/- (R.K. PANDA) (D.K. AGARWAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI: 18TH NOVEMBER 2011. NG: COPY TO : ITA NO. 6257/M/10 MRS. LEELA B. PATIL. 3 1. DEPARTMENT. 2.ASSESSEE. 3 CIT(A)-3 MUMBAI. 4 CIT-11 MUMBAI. 5.DR H BENCH MUMBAI. 6.MASTER FILE. (TRUE COPY) BY ORDER ASST.REGISTRAR ITAT MUMBAI. ITA NO. 6257/M/10 MRS. LEELA B. PATIL. 4 DETAILS DATE INITIALS DESIGNA TION 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 14-11-2011 SR.PS/ 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 14-11-2011 SR.PS/ 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER JM/AM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER JM/ AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS SR.PS/ 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON SR.PS/ 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK SR.PS/ 8. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE AR 10. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER