The Income-tax Officer, Ward-2(2), Vadodara v. Roshanlal D Bhalotia
[Citation -2016-LL-0928-164]

Citation 2016-LL-0928-164
Appellant Name The Income-tax Officer, Ward-2(2), Vadodara
Respondent Name Roshanlal D Bhalotia
Court ITAT-Ahmedabad
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 28/09/2016
Assessment Year 2005-06
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags tax effect
Bot Summary: CAB/II-180/12-13, in proceedings under section 143(3) r.w.s. 254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short the Act. There is no dispute that the net tax effect in the instant appeal is less than Rs.10 lacs. We find that the Central Board of Direct Taxes; hereafter the Board has issued the circular no. 21/2015 dated 10.12.2015 clearly envisaging therein that department s pending appeals before the tribunal/high courts are to be withdrawn/not pressed as per the above stated circular. The same has been declared to be having retrospective effect in other words. We take into consideration the above stated Boards circular and dismiss the instant appeal accordingly. This Revenue s appeal is dismissed as having low tax effect.


IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD SMC BENCH AHMEDABAD BEFORE, SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. ITA Nos.2950/Ahd/2013 (Assessment Year:2005-06) Income-tax Officer, Ward-2(2), 204, Aayakar Bhavan, Race Course Circle, Vadodara - 390007 Appellant Vs. Shri Roshanlal D Bhalotia Plot No.493, GIDC, Makarpura, Baroda - 390010 Respondent PAN: ABYPB8891K/By Revenue : Shri Prasoon Kabra, Sr. D.R. By Assessee : Shri Niranjan M. Vaidya, A.R. Date of Hearing : 15.09.2016 Date of Pronouncement : 28.09.2016 ORDER PER S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER This Revenue s appeal for A.Y. 2005-06, arises from order of CIT(A)-II, Baroda, dated 24.10.2013 in appeal no. CAB/II-180/12-13, in proceedings under section 143(3) r.w.s. 254 of Income Tax Act, 1961; in short Act . 2. Revenue s sole substantive ground is as under: ITA No.2950/Ahd/2013 (ITO vs Shri Roshanlal D Bhalotia) A.Y. 2005-06 -2- 1. On facts and in circumstances of case and in law, ld. CIT(Appeals) erred in allowing transportation charges of Rs.23,66,150/- which were disallowed by Assessing Officer u/s.40(a)(ia) due to failure of TDS deduction by assessee. ld. CIT(Appeals) allowed transportation charges, without appreciation fact that after giving umpteen opportunities assessee failed to produce any documentary evidence which may substantiate his claim. 3. There is no dispute that net tax effect in instant appeal is less than Rs.10 lacs. We find that Central Board of Direct Taxes; hereafter Board has issued circular no. 21/2015 dated 10.12.2015 clearly envisaging therein that department s pending appeals before tribunal/high courts are to be withdrawn/not pressed as per above stated circular. same has been declared to be having retrospective effect in other words. We take into consideration above stated Boards circular and dismiss instant appeal accordingly. 4. This Revenue s appeal is dismissed as having low tax effect. [Pronounced in open Court on this 28th day of September, 2016.] Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH BORAD) (S. S. GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad: Dated 28/09/2016 True Copy S.K.SINHA Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. Revenue 2. Assessee 3. Concerned CIT 4. - CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. Guard file. By order Income-tax Officer, Ward-2(2), Vadodara v. Roshanlal D Bhalotia
Report Error