Surgilabs, Chennai vs Department Of Income Tax

अपीलाथ क ओर से / Appellant by : Shri. A.V. Sreekanth, IRS, JCIT. यथ क ओर से / Respondent by : Shri. A.S. Sriraman, Advocate

सन ु वाई क तार ख/Date of hearing : 19.05.2015 घोषणा क तार ख /Date of Pronouncement : 29.05.2015

आदे श / O R D E R

PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

This appeal by Revenue is directed against the order of the

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-V, Chennai, dated 03.06.2013

for the assessment year 2008-09.

:- 2 -: I.T.A.No.1754/Mds/2013.

2. In this appeal, the Revenue has raised the following grounds:-

''2.1 The learned CIT(A) erred in holding that an amount of ₹11,32,082/- is not taxable as deemed dividend u/s.2(22)(e) in the hands of the assessee firm, on the basis of fresh evidence produced before him in the form of ledge account of the assessee appearing in the books of M/s. Vibrant Consultancy and Training Pvt. Ltd.

2.2. Having regard to the provisions of Rule 46A of the I.T.Rules, the ld. CIT(A) ought t have given an opportunity to the Assessing Officer to examine the fresh evidence produced before him for the first time.

2.3 Without prejudice to the above ground of appeal, it is submitted that the learned CIT(A) ought to have decided the impugned issue on the basis of the Hon'ble Delhi Court's judgment in the case of CIT vs. National Travel Services (347 ITR 305).

3. We have heard both the parties and perused the material on

record. As seen from the order of CIT(A), the tax effect involved in

this appeal is less than B4,00,000/- as the addition towards deemed

dividend u/s.2(22)(e) is B11,32,082/- which is less than monetary

limits fixed by the CBDT to file appeal by the Revenue as per CBDT

circular No.5/2014, dated 10th July, 2014 wherein the monetary limit

fixed at B4,00,000/- to file appeal before the Tribunal. The ld

Departmental Representative submitted that the Board's circular

No.5/2014 issued on 10.7.2014 revising the monetary limits for filing

of appeals by the department before the Tribunal will apply to the

appeals filed on or after 10.07.2014 and not to the appeal filed prior to

10.07.2014. Thus, ld. Departmental Representative vehemently

opposed the argument of the assessee and stated that this instruction :- 3 -: I.T.A.No.1754/Mds/2013.

is prospective and not retrospective. In our opinion, as held by the

Kolkata Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITO vs. Sujit Pandey vide

order dated 10.09.2014 in ITA No.1914(Kol)/2012, the CBDT

instruction No.5/2014, dated 10.7.2014 had revised the monetary limit

for filing an appeal to Tribunal to B4,00,000/- and the same would be

applicable to pending appeals also for the reason that the same is

exactly identical to earlier instructions issued by CBDT, therefore,

where tax effect was less than B4,00,000/- appeal was not

maintainable. Being so, the Revenue authorities are precluded from

filing of appeal in this case also. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed

as un-admitted.

4. In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed.

Order pronounced on Friday, the 29th day of May, 2015, at Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (वी. दग ु ा! राव) (चं पज ू ार ) V. DURGA RAO (CHANDRA POOJARI) या"यक सद य / JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद य/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे"नई/Chennai. #दनांक/Dated:29.05.2015. KV

आदे श क त&ल'प अ(े'षत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ /Appellant 2. यथ / Respondent 3. आयकर आयु*त (अपील)/CIT(A) 4. आयकर आयु*त/CIT 5. 'वभागीय त न-ध/DR 6. गाड फाईल/GF.

:- 4 -: I.T.A.No.1754/Mds/2013.