Rajesh Sharma, New Delhi vs Department Of Income Tax
- CitationITA No. 4639/Del/2011
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Revenue's appeal against an order deleting a penalty under section 271(1)(c) is not maintainable where the tax effect is below the monetary limit fixed by CBDT Instruction No. 5/2014 dated 10.7.2014, that instruction having statutory force under section 268A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and being applicable to pending appeals.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
ITA No. 4639/Del/2011 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Income-tax Officer, vs. Rajesh Sharma, Ward 26(1), 40-First Floor, New Delhi. Raja Garden, New Delhi. (PAN: ANXPS2862E) (Appellant) (Respondent)
Department by: Shri Vikram Sahay, Sr. DR Assessee by: None
Date of hearing : 02.06.2015 Date of pronouncement: 17:06.2015
ORDER
PER I.C. SUDHIR: JUDICIAL MEMBER In the present appeal, we find that the Revenue has questioned
deletion of penalty levied under sec. 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961
at Rs.3,50,812 by the Learned CIT(Appeals). The tax effect thereof is below
Rs.4 lacs. As per the latest CBDT Instruction No. 5/2014 dated 10.7.2014,
the Revenue is not supposed to prefer appeal having tax effect below Rs. 4
lacs against the First Appellate Order before the ITAT. This instruction
regarding the pecuniary limit for preferring the appeal before the ITAT by
the Revenue has now statutory force under sec. 268A of the Income-tax Act,
1961. Thus, present appeal has been preferred by the Revenue in violation of
the said instruction as the said instruction is also applicable in the pending 2
appeals as per the decisions of Hon'ble jurisdictional Delhi High Court in
the case of CIT vs. M/s. P.S. Jain & Co. in ITA No. 179/1991 dated
02.08.2010 and in the case of CIT vs. Delhi Race Club Ltd. - order dated
03.03.2011.The present appeal is thus not maintainable and it is dismissed as
such.
2. In result, the appeal is dismissed.
Decision pronounced in the open court on 17.06.2015
Sd/- Sd/-
( J.S.REDDY ) ( I.C. SUDHIR ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Dated: 17 /06/2015 Mohan Lal
Copy forwarded to: 1) Appellant 2) Respondent 3) CIT 4) CIT(Appeals) 5) DR:ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 3
Date Draft dictated on computer 17 .06.2015
Draft placed before author 17. 06.2015 Draft proposed & placed before the second 17.06.2015 member Draft discussed/approved by Second Member. Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS 18.06.2015 Kept for pronouncement on 17.06.2015 File sent to the Bench Clerk 19.06.2015 Date on which file goes to the AR Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk.
Date of dispatch of Order.
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