ITO,, Ludhiana v. M/s Devki Nandan & Sons,, Ludhiana

ITA 966/CHANDI/2009 | 2005-2006
Pronouncement Date: 27-07-2011 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 96621514 RSA 2009
Assessee PAN AAAFD9269J
Bench Chandigarh
Appeal Number ITA 966/CHANDI/2009
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 19 day(s)
Appellant ITO,, Ludhiana
Respondent M/s Devki Nandan & Sons,, Ludhiana
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 27-07-2011
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted A
Tribunal Order Date 27-07-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 05-09-2011
Next Hearing Date 05-09-2011
Assessment Year 2005-2006
Appeal Filed On 08-12-2009
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES A CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI D.K.SRIVASTAVA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS SUSHMA CHOWLA JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.966/CHD/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005-06 THE ITO VS. M/S DEVKI NANDAN & SONS WARD V(1) LUDHIANA LUDHIANA PAN NO. AAAFD9269J (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI N.K.SAINI RESPONDENT BY: SHRI SUBHASH AGGARWAL ORDER PER SUSHMA CHOWLA JM THE APPEAL BY THE REV IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A )-II LUDHIANA DATED 14.7.2009 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE I.T. ACT 1961. 2. THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL:- 1. THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A)-II HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 2 42 328/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF VIOLATION OF SECTION 40(A)(IA) READ WITH SECTION 194C OF THE INC OME TAX ACT 1961. 2. BUT FOR TWO OR THREE PAYMENTS (SUBSEQUENTLY REIMBURSED BY HPCL) THE ENTIRE FREIGHT PAYMENT OF RS. 3 42 328/- HAS BEEN MADE BY ASSESSEE TO M/S TEMPO UNION SAHNEWAL (REGD) G.T. ROAD SAHNEWAL (LUDHIANA) IN WHOLE FINANCIAL YEAR 2004-05. IT IS SUFFICIENT TO PROVE THAT ORAL AGREEMENT FOR SPECIFI C PERIOD EXISTED BETWEEN ASSESSEE AND THE TRANSPORTER S. ACCORDINGLY RATIO OF JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY HON'BL E JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT (TDS) 2 CHANDIGARH VS. M/S UNITED RICE LAND LTD IS DISTINGUISHED VIS-A-VIS FACTS OF THE CASE AND HAND. 3. THE LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE AT THE OUTSET PO INTED OUT THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN THE APPEAL IS LESS THAN THE PRESCRIBED LI MIT OF RS. 2 LAKHS/ . HOWEVER LD. DR FOR THE REVENUE SUPPORTED THE ASSE SSMENT ORDER. 4. FROM THE PERUSAL OF RECORDS IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE REVENUE EFFECT INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IS LESS THAN RS.2.00 LACS. THEREFORE IN VIEW OF THE DECISIONS OF THE HONBLE MUMBAI HIGH COURT IN T HE CASE OF CIT VS. CAMCO COLOUR CO. (254 ITR 565) CIT VS. PITHWA ENG G. WORKS REPORTED IN 276 ITR 519 AND CIT VS. ZOEB Y. TOPIWALA (284 IT R 379) THE APPEAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE. FURTHER THE ISSUE WAS ALSO C ONSIDERED BY THE CBDT VIDE ITS CIRCULAR DATED 27.03.2000 WHEREIN IT REFL ECT THE POLICY DECISION TAKEN BY THE BOARD NOT TO RAISE QUESTIONS OF LAW WH ERE THE TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN THE AMOUNT PRESCRIBED IN THE INSTRUCTIONS WITH A VIEW TO REDUCE LITIGATION BEFORE THE HIGH COURTS AND THE SUPREME C OURT. THEREFORE THERE IS NO JUSTIFICATION TO PROCEED WITH THE APPEAL HAVI NG TAX EFFECT LESS THAN RS.2.00 LAKHS. 5. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE I S DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 27 TH DAY OF JULY 2011. SD/- SD/- (D.K.SRIVASTAVA) (SUSHMA CHOWLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : JULY 2011 RKK COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR 3 TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT CHANDIGARH