DCIT, New Delhi v. AR Loomtex India (P) Ltd., New Delhi

MA 343/DEL/2011 | 2004-2005
Pronouncement Date: 31-07-2012 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 34320124 RSA 2011
Assessee PAN AAACA6934E
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number MA 343/DEL/2011
Duration Of Justice 7 month(s) 7 day(s)
Appellant DCIT, New Delhi
Respondent AR Loomtex India (P) Ltd., New Delhi
Appeal Type Miscellaneous Application
Pronouncement Date 31-07-2012
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted A
Tribunal Order Date 31-07-2012
Assessment Year 2004-2005
Appeal Filed On 23-12-2011
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH A : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI I.C. SUDHIR JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.C. MEENA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MA NO.343/DEL/2011 (IN ITA NO.3787/DEL./2010) (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05) DCIT CIRCLE 2 (1) VS. AR LOOMTEX INDIA (P) LTD. NEW DELHI. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS AR LOOMTEX (INDIA) LTD.) MANGLAM PLACE SECTOR 3 ROHINI DELHI. (PAN : AAACA6934E) (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT/ASSESSEE BY : SHRI MANU MONGA ADVOCATE REVENUE BY : SHRI SATPAL SINGH DR ORDER PER B.C. MEENA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : THIS MISC. APPLICATION IS FILED BY THE REVENUE UNDE R SECTION 254(2) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT 1961. THE REVENUE HAS PRAYED T HAT THE TAX EFFECT WAS BELOW THE MONETARY LIMIT AS PER INSTRUCTION NO.5/20 08 OF CBDT BUT THE CASE FALLS UNDER EXCEPTION LAID DOWN AT PARA NO.8(C) IN INSTRUCTION NO.5/2008 OF CBDT AS THE REVENUE AUDIT OBJECTION WAS ACCEPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT. 2. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES ON THE ISSUE. THE TRIBUNAL HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL ON ACCOUNT OF LOW TAX EFFECT. ADMITTEDL Y THE TAX EFFECT WAS BELOW RS.2 LACS. NOW THE REVENUE CLAIMS THAT THE CASE FA LLS UNDER THE EXCEPTION LAID MA NO.343/DEL/2011 (IN ITA NO.3787/DEL./2010 2 DOWN IN THE AFORESAID INSTRUCTION BUT AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL NOTHING WAS POINTED OUT IN THIS REGARD THAT THE CAS E FALLS UNDER THE EXCEPTION TO THE INSTRUCTION NO.5/2008. THERE IS NO APPARENT MISTAKE FROM THE RECORDS. ITAT HAS POWER TO RECTIFY MISTAKES APPARENT FROM RE CORD. THEREFORE IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW THERE IS NO MISTAKE APPARENT FROM THE ORDER WHICH DESERVES TO BE RECTIFIED AS PER PROVISIONS OF SECTION 254(2) OF THE ACT. KEEPING THESE FACTS IN VIEW WE DISMISS THIS REVENUES MISC. APPL ICATION. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THIS 31 ST DAY OF JULY 2012. SD/- SD/- (I.C. SUDHIR) (B.C. MEENA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED THE 31 ST DAY OF JULY 2012 TS COPY FORWARDED TO: 1.APPELLANT 2.RESPONDENT 3.CIT 4.CIT(A)-V NEW DELHI. 5.CIT(ITAT) NEW DELHI. AR ITAT NEW DELHI.