Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi
Sahara India Real Estate Corp. Ltd., ... vs Dcit, New Delhi on 21 December, 2017
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCH "G": NEW DELHI
BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER
AND
SHRI B.P. JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
I.T.A NO. 5264/DEL/2014
A.Y. 2009-10
Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/s Sahara India Real Estate Corp. Ltd.
Circle-6 1- Kapoorthala Complex,
Room No. 334, Aliganj, Lucknow
ARA Centre, Jhandewalan Extn.,
New Delhi (PAN:AAJCS7265F)
(APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT)
AND
CROSS OBJECTION NO. 220/Del/2017
(IN ITA NO. 5264/DEL/2014
A.Y. 2009-10
M/s Sahara India Real Estate Corp. Ltd. vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income
1- Kapoorthala Complex, Tax, Circle-6,
Aliganj, Lucknow Room NO. 334, ARA Centre,
Jhandewalan Extn., New Delhi
(APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT)
Department by : Sh. Kaushlendra Tiwari, Sr. DR
Assessee by : Sh. Dinesh Verma, Adv. & Sh. Hardeep Singh, CA
ORDER
PER H.S. SIDHU, JM
The Department has filed this Appeal and Assessee has filed the Cross Objection which is emanate from the Order dated 17.7.2014 of Ld. CIT(A)-1, New Delhi pertaining to assessment year 2009-10. The grounds raised in the revenue's appeal reads as under:-
" On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in:-2
1. The order of Ld. CIT(A) is not correct in law and facts.
2. On the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the penalty of Rs. 5,46,754/- imposed by Addl. CIT u/s. 271E of the I.T. Act, 1961.
3. The appellant craves leave to add, amend any / all the grounds of appeal before or during the course of hearing of the appeal."
2. At the time of hearing, Ld. Counsel of the assessee has stated that the tax effect in the Revenue's Appeal is below the prescribed limit of Rs. 10 lacs as fixed by the CBDT. Therefore, he requested that the Appeal of the Revenue may be dismissed on this account. However, he did not press the Cross Objection filed by the Assessee.
3. On the other hand, Ld. DR did not controvert the contention raised by the Ld. Counsel of the assessee, but he relied upon the order of the AO.
4. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. We find considerable cogency in the contention of the Ld. Counsel of the assessee that the tax effect in the Revenue's appeal is below the limit of Rs. 10 lacs, as fixed by the CBDT and, therefore, the Department's Appeal is not maintainable, in view of the Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10th December, 2015 issued vide F.No. 279/Misc. 142/2007-ITJ (Pt.) by the CBDT. For the sake of convenience, the relevant para nos. 3 & 10 of the aforesaid CBDT's Circular are reproduced as under:-
"3. Henceforth, appeals/ SLPs shall not be filed in cases where the tax effect does not exceed the monetary limits given hereunder:
Monetary Limit (in S No Appeals in Income-tax matters Rs) 1 Before Appellate Tribunal 10,00,000/- 2 Before High Court 20,00,000/-
3 Before Supreme Court 25,00,000/-
It is clarified that an appeal should not be filed merely because the tax effect in a case exceeds the monetary limits prescribed above. Filing of appeal in such cases is to be decided on merits of the case.
10. This instruction will apply retrospectively to pending appeals and appeals to be filed henceforth in High Courts/ Tribunals. Pending appeals below the specified tax limits in para 3 above may be 3 withdrawn/ not pressed. Appeals before the Supreme Court will be governed by the instructions on this subject, operative at the time when such appeal was filed."
5. It is not in dispute that the Board's instruction or directions issued to the income- tax authorities are binding on those authorities, therefore, the Department should have withdrawn/ not pressed the present Appeal, in view of the aforesaid instructions since the tax effect in the instant Appeal is less than the amount of Rs. 10 lacs, prescribed in the above said CBDT's Instructions.
6. Keeping in view the CBDT Instruction No. 21/2015 dated 10th December, 2015, we are of the view that the Revenue should have withdrawn/ not pressed the instant appeal before the Tribunal. We are also of the view that the said Instructions are applicable for the pending appeals and appeals to be filed henceforth in Tribunal. Accordingly, the Revenue's Appeal is dismissed.
ASSESSEE'S CROSS OBJECTION
7. As far as Assessee's Cross Objection is concerned, since the Ld. Counsel of the Assesseee did not press the Cross Objection, hence, the same is dismissed as such.
8. In the result, the Revenue's Appeal as well as Assessee's Cross Objection stand dismissed.
Order pronounced on 21/12/2017.
Sd/- Sd/-
[B.P. JAIN] [H.S. SIDHU]
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Dated: 21/12/2017
*SR BHATNAGAR*
Copy forwarded to: -
1. Appellant
2. Respondent
3. CIT
4. CIT(A)
5. DR, ITAT
TRUE COPY By Order,
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR