Mool Chand, New Delhi vs Assessee

These are Cross Appeals. ITA 5255/Del/2010 is Revenue's appeal and ITA no.5412/Del/2010 is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of Ld.CIT(A)-XXVI, New Delhi dated 16.9.2010 pertaining to the A.Y. 2006-07

2. We have heard Shri Ankit Gupta, Ld.Counsel for the assessee and Shri P.Damkanunjna, Ld.Sr.D.R. on behalf of the Revenue.

3. On a query from the Bench the Ld.D.R. vehemently contended that the tax effect in the case on hand is more than the limit prescribed by the CBDT at the time of filing of the appeal and that the fresh Circular of the CBDT clearly mentions that the tax effect limit of Rs.4 lakhs is prospective in nature and hence the limits ITA 5412/Del/2010 ITA 5255/Del/2010 Sh. Mool Chand, New Delhi A.Y. 2006-07 prescribed in the Circular cannot be applied to appeals filed for the earlier Assessment Years and contended that the limit applies to appeals filed after the date of the Circular.

3.1. The Ld.Counsel for the assessee submitted that the tax effect in the appeals of the Revenue, is below the prescribed limit of Rs.4 lakhs for filing of appeal before the ITAT. The CBDT in its Instruction No. 5/2014, prescribed the revised monetary limit for filing appeal to Tribunal at Rs.4 lacs. It was contended that this revised monetary limits are applicable to pending cases.

4. We have heard rival contentions and perused the material on record. The Tribunal, in the case of "DCIT vs. Sushila Saraogi (2014) (11) TMI 294" ITAT Kolkata, after considering the precedents on the subject, held that the Instruction no.5/14, issued by the CBDT on 10.7.2014 is applicable to the pending appeals. The Tribunal followed the proposition laid down in the judgements of various High Courts, including the two judgements of the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s PS Jain & Co. in ITA 179/1991 dt. 2.8.2010 and in the case of CIT vs. Delhi Race Club Ltd. dt. 3.3.2011. We respectfully follow the Co-Ordinate Bench Order. In the instant cases, as the tax effect being below Rs. 4 lacs, we without going into the issue on merits, dismiss the appeals of the Revenue in limine as not maintainable. It is to be mentioned that the Ld.DR was unable to point out any exceptional circumstances, mentioned in Board Instruction no.5 of 2014 that have led to filing of these appeals, despite the fact of the monetary limit being below the prescribed limit.

5. In the result the appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed.

6. Coming to assessee's appeal i.e. ITA 5412/Del/2010 for the A.Y.

2006-07, after hearing rival contentions we hold as follows.

7. Ground nos. 1 and 2 are general in nature.

8. In ground no.3 the assessee contests the partial disallowance sustained by the First Appellate Authority. Similarly ground nos. 4 and 5

2 ITA 5412/Del/2010 ITA 5255/Del/2010 Sh. Mool Chand, New Delhi A.Y. 2006-07 are against upholding addition of Rs.92,120/- and Rs.29,40,850/- by the First Appellate Authority. The Ld.Counsel submitted that there is no basis whatsoever for the First Appellate Authority to sustain these additions. On a query from the Bench he submitted that in view of the smallness of the amount and on a condition that it would not be a precedent, he would not press the ground. In view of the above submission we dismiss this appeal of the assessee.

9. In the result assesse's appeal is dismissed.

10. In the result the appeal filed by the assessee as well as the appeal filed by the Revenue both are dismissed.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 29th June, 2015.

Sd/- Sd/- (I.C. SUDHIR) (J. SUDHAKAR REDDY) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Dated: 29th June, 2015

· Manga

Copy forwarded to: - 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY

By Order,

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

3