Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 1]

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Jaipur

Income Tax Officer, Jaipur vs Smt. Shalu Devi Agarwal, Jaipur on 27 July, 2018

               vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj U;k;ihB] t;iqj
 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR

 Jh fot; iky jko] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k
BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM

             vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 401/JP/2018
             fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2009-10

Income Tax Officer,          cuke Smt. Shalu Devi Agarwal,
Ward 1(5),                   Vs.    1362, Khejron Ka Rasta, Chandpole
Jaipur.                             Bazar, Jaipur.
LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AEMPA 0608 N
vihykFkhZ@Appellant                 izR;FkhZ@Respondent

     jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri J.C. Kulhari (JCIT)
     fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj l@
                         s Assessee by : Shri P.C. Parwal (CA).

       lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing: 26/07/2018
       mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement : 27/07/2018

                                vkns'k@ ORDER

PER: VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M.:

This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 21/01/2018 of CIT (A)-1, Jaipur for the assessment year 2009-10. The Revenue has raised sole ground of appeal, which is as under:
"Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A)-1 was justified in quashing the assessment order without considering the case on merit and without appreciating the factual matrix at the time out of issuance of notice U/s 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961?"

2. At the time of hearing, the ld. AR of the assessee has raised an objection of maintainability of the appeal of the Revenue due to the tax effect not exceeding Rs. 20 lacs as per the CBDT Circle No. 3 of 2018 dated 11th July, 2018. The ld. A/R submitted that in the facts of the present case, tax effect in 2 ITA No. 401/JP/2018 ITO Vs. Shalu Devi Agarwal Revenue's appeal is stated to be Rs. 15,74,900/- on the addition of Rs 71,90,130/- which is below the prescribed limit of Rs 20 lacs.

3. The ld. D/R has fairly submitted that the tax effect involved in the Revenue's appeal is less than 20 lacs which is prescribed threshold limit in terms of the CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11th July, 2018 issued in supersession of its earlier Circular No. 21 of 2015 dated 10.12.2015.

4. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the materials available on record. It is observed that the demand/ tax effect in the Revenue's appeal in question is below Rs. 20.00 lacs. Under the powers vested by section. 268A(1) of the I T Act, CBDT has recently issued Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11 t h July, 2018 (F No. 279/Misc. 142/2007-ITJ(Pt) instructing the authorities below that departmental appeal should not be filed before ITAT where the demand/tax effect does not exceed Rs. 20 lacs. The circular is specifically mentioned to be applicable for all pending appeals.

5. Subject to some exceptions, it is further directed by CBDT that all the departmental appeals pending before ITAT where the demand/tax effect is not exceeding than 20 lacs should be either withdrawn or not pressed by the departmental representatives.

6. The present appeal is not covered by any exceptions mentioned in the said CBDT circular. Since the tax demand in dispute in this departmental appeal is below the limit set out by CBDT for the appeal, the appeal of the assessee is not maintainable in view of CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018 dated 3 ITA No. 401/JP/2018 ITO Vs. Shalu Devi Agarwal 11.07.2018. Accordingly the appeal of the Department is dismissed as not pressed/withdrawn.

7. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 27/07/2018.

         Sd/-                                            Sd/-
 ¼fot; iky jko½                                     ¼foØe flag ;kno½
  (Vijay Pal Rao)                                  (Vikram Singh Yadav)
U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member                    ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member

Tk;iqj@Jaipur
fnukad@Dated:- 27th July, 2018
*Ranjan

vkns'k dh izfrfyfi vxzfs 'kr@Copy of the order forwarded to:

1. vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- The ITO, Ward 1(5), Jaipur.
2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- Smt. Shalu Devi Agarwal, Jaipur.
3. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT
4. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT(A)
5. foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k] vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k]t;iqj@DR, ITAT, Jaipur
6. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No. 401/JP/2018) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order, lgk;d iathdkj@Asst. Registrar