Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi
Ime International Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs Department Of Income Tax on 6 January, 2016
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCH 'C', NEW DELHI
BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER
AND
SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
ITA No. 3680/Del/2010
Assessment Year: 2002-03
Income Tax Officer, vs. M/s IME International Pvt Ltd.
Ward 11(3) 211, New Delhi House,
Room No. 374A, CR Building, 27, Barakhamba Road,
New Delhi New Delhi
(PAN: AAACI181126)
Cross Objection No. 259/Del/2011
Assessment Year: 2002-03
M/s IME International Pvt. Ltd., vs. Income Tax Officer,
211, New Delhi House, Ward 11(3),
27, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi
New Delhi
(PAN: AAACI181126)
(Appellant) (Respondent)
Appellant by : Sh. T. Vasanthan, Sr. DR
Respondent by : Sh. Tarun Kumar, Adv.
Date of Hearing : 15-12-2015
Date of Order : 06-1-2016
ORDER
PER H.S. SIDHU, J.M.
This appeal by the Department and the Cross Objection by the Assessee is directed against the Order dated 10.5.2010 of Ld. CIT(A)-XIII, New Delhi pertaining to assessment year 2002-03 on the following grounds:-
1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is wrong, perverse, illegal and agaisnt the provisions of law which is liable to be reversed.
2. On the facts and circumstnaces of the case and in law, the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is perverse in deleting the addition of Rs.ITA NO. 3680/DEL/2010 & CO No. 259/Del/2011 2
16,00,000/- u/s. 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961 as credit worthiness and genuineness of the transaction regarding receipt of Share Application money from the parties mentioend in the assessment order was not proved before the AO in spite of several opportunities afforded to the assessee company.
3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in giving relief to the assesee by ignoring assessee's failure to produce the share applicants for verifications.
4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not considering the fact that the share applicants admitted before the investigation wing that they were in business of providing accommodation entry.
5. The appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend any ground of appeal raised above at the time of hearing."
2. We have heard both the parties and perused the material on record. We find that Revenue in the Grounds of Appeal before the Tribunal has challenged the deletion of addition of Rs. 16,00,000/- u/s. 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961 vide ground no. 2, as aforesaid. We also find that Ld. CIT(A) vide his impugend order dated 10.5.2010 vide para no. 5 at page 34 has held as under:-
"5.......Accordingly, the AO was not justified in treating Rs. 16,00,000/-
the amount of share application money received by the appellant as its undisclosed income.
Therefore this gorund of appeal is allowed."
3. From the above, we find that the tax effect in the Revenue's Appeal is less than Rs.10,00,000/-, therefore, the Department's Appeal is not maintainable, in view of the Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10th December, 2015 issued vide ITA NO. 3680/DEL/2010 & CO No. 259/Del/2011 3 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
S No Appeals in Income-tax matters
(in 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 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."
4. 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. ITA NO. 3680/DEL/2010 & CO No. 259/Del/2011 4
5. 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.
6. As regards the Cross Objection filed by the Assessee is concerned, the same is in support of the impugend order passed by the Ld. CIT(A), hence, the same is dismissed as infructuous.
7. In the result, Appeal filed by the Revenue as well as Cross Objection filed by the Assessee stand dismissed.
Order pronounced in the Open Court on 06/1/2016.
Sd/- Sd/-
(O.P. KANT) (H.S. SIDHU)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Dated: 06/1/2016
*SR BHATNAGAR*
Copy forwarded to: -
1. Appellant
2. Respondent
3. CIT
4. CIT(A)
5. DR, ITAT
TRUE COPY By Order,
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR