Amit Digvijay Singh, Nashik vs Department Of Income Tax
- CitationITA No.1945/PN/2012
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Tribunal's dismissal rests on the rule that an appeal by the Revenue is not maintainable before the Tribunal where the tax effect of the issues raised is below the monetary threshold fixed by the CBDT in Instruction No. 5 of 2014, which bars filing in such cases where the tax effect is below Rupees four lakhs, and that the Department's failure to contest the factual finding that the tax effect falls below that limit makes the bar applicable.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 1, Nashik. .... Appellant
Vs.
Amit Digvijay Singh, Durgesh Residency, Gangapur Road, Nashik PAN : AQZPS2999F .... Respondent
Department by : Shri Sandeep Garg, CIT Assessee by : Shri S. N. Doshi Date of hearing : 16-03-2015 Date of pronouncement : 31-03-2015
ORDER
PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM :
The captioned appeal preferred by the Revenue against the order of the
Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-I, Nashik dated 24.07.2012 which, in
turn, has arisen from the order dated 31.12.2009 passed by the Assessing
Officer under section 144 r.w.s. 153B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short
"the Act") pertaining to the assessment year 2008-09.
2. In this appeal, the solitary issue raised by the Revenue is with regard to
the action of the CIT(A) in deleting the additions of (i) Rs.6,00,000/- on
account of estimation of income; and, (ii) Rs.5,06,697/- on account of jewellery
found during the course of search action pertaining to assessment year
2008-09.
3. In brief, the relevant facts are that assessee is an individual engaged in
the business of hiring motor vehicles. Initially, assessee had not filed his
return of income u/s 139 of the Act. A search action u/s 132 of the Act was
conducted on 28.06.2007 in the case of Singh Bhutada group of cases and 2 ITA No.1945/PN/2012
the Assessing Officer further issued notice u/s 142(1) of the Act on 05.10.2009
for filing of return of income. In response to notice u/s 142(1) of the Act,
assessee had not filed his return of income. The Assessing Officer assessed
the income on the basis of information collected during the course of search
proceedings and made the additions of (i) Rs.6,00,000/- on account of
estimation of income; and, (ii) Rs.5,06,697/- on account of jewellery. Being
aggrieved with the action of the Assessing Officer, assessee carried the matter
before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) has not agreed with the stand of the Assessing
Officer and deleted the aforesaid impugned additions. Not being satisfied with
the decision of the CIT(A), Revenue is in appeal before us.
4. At the time of hearing, a preliminarily objection was raised by the Ld.
Representative for the respondent-assessee to the effect that the captioned
appeal is not maintainable in view of Instruction No.5 of 2014 dated
10.07.2014 issued by the CBDT. The plea raised before us is that the tax
effect in respect of the issue raised in the present appeal is below the limit
prescribed by CBDT in its Instruction No.5 of 2014 (supra) for filing of appeals
before the Tribunal.
5. In response, the Ld. Departmental Representative has not contested
the factual matrix that the tax effect involved in present appeal is below the
monetary limits prescribed by the CBDT in its Instruction No.5 of 2014 (supra)
regarding filing of appeals before the Tribunal.
6. In view of the aforesaid factual position, it is evident that the captioned
appeal is not maintainable and is hit by the monetary limits prescribed by the
CBDT vide Instruction No.5 of 2014 (supra) for filing of appeals before the
Tribunal. Notably, as per the CBDT Instruction No.5 of 2014 (supra) appeal
before the Tribunal shall not be filed in cases where the tax effect in respect of
the issues raised is below Rupees four lacs. As a result of the aforesaid 3 ITA No.1945/PN/2012
discussion, in our view, the present appeal of the Revenue is not maintainable
in the light of the CBDT Instruction No.5 of 2014 (supra). Accordingly, the
captioned appeal is dismissed as not maintainable.
7. In the result, the captioned appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, as
above.
Order pronounced on 31 st March, 2015.
Sd/- Sd/- (G.S. PANNU) (SUSHMA CHOWLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Pune, Dated: 31 st March, 2015. Sujeet
Copy of the order is forwarded to: - 1) The Assessee; 2) The Department; 3) The CIT(A)-I, Nashik; 4) The CIT-I, Nashik; 5) The DR "A" Bench, I.T.A.T., Pune; 6) Guard File.
By Order //True Copy//
Assistant Registrar I.T.A.T., Pune
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free