Yatish Chandra Gupta, New Delhi vs Department Of Income Tax

ITA no. 3386/Del/2013 A.Y. 2009-10 ACIT, Circle 47(1), Vs. Shri Yatish Chandra Gupta, New Delhi. R-116, Greater Kailash, New Delhi. PAN: AAIPG 1068 N

( Appellant ) ( Respondent )

Appellant by : Shri B/R.R.Kumar Sr. DR Respondent by : Shri Satyajeet Goel CA

Date of hearing : 27-01-2015 Date of order : 30-01-2015.

ORDER

PER S.V. MEHROTRA, A.M:-

This appeal, preferred by the department, is directed against the order dated 22-03-2013, passed by the CIT(Appeals)-XXX, New Delhi in appeal no. 3340/2011-12, relating to A.Y.2009-10. Sole effective ground raised is as under:

"On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing relief of Rs. 10,80,000/- on account of disallowance of claim of HRA ignoring the fact that the assessee is the co-owner of the property on which he is claiming HRA exemption u/s 10 of the I.T. Act, 1961."

2 2. The learned counsel for the assessee at the very out set contended that the

tax effect involved in present appeal is below Rs. 4 lacs and, therefore, the appeal

filed by the revenue is not maintainable in view of recent CBDT instruction,

which is binding on the departments.

4. On the other hand, the learned DR contended that the appeal should not be

dismissed on account of tax effect only.

5. We have heard rival submissions of the parties and perused the entire

material on record. As per recent CBDT Instruction no. 5/2014 dated 10-7-2014,

the monetary limit for filing appeal by the department before the ITAT has been

revised to Rs. 4 lacs. Thus, the departmental appeals, involving tax effect below

Rs. 4 lacs, are not maintainable before the ITAT.

5.1. The Hon'ble Jurisdictional Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Delhi

Race Club Ltd. in ITA No. 128/2008, order dated 03.03.2011, by following the

earlier order dated 02.08.2010 in ITA No. 179/1991 in the case of CIT Delhi-III vs.

M/s P.S. Jain & Co., has held that such instruction/ circular would also be

applicable to pending cases.

5.2. Admittedly the tax effect involved in the present appeal is below Rs. 4 lakhs.

Therefore, in view of the revised instruction of the CBDT, referred to above, and 3

the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court's decision in the case of Delhi Race Club

Ltd., supra, the departmental appeal is not maintainable.

6. In the result, departmental appeal is dismissed.

Order pronounced in open court on 30 -01-2015.

Sd/- Sd/- (GEORGE GEORGE K. ) ( S.V. MEHROTRA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 30-01-2015. MP Copy to : 1. Assessee 2. AO 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR