DCIT, Cent.Cir.2(2), Ahmedabad v. Govindbhai Atmaram Dalwadi - 2016-LL-1005-87

Citation	2016-LL-1005-87
Appellant Name	DCIT, Cent.Cir.2(2), Ahmedabad
Respondent Name	Govindbhai Atmaram Dalwadi
Court	ITAT-Ahmedabad
Relevant Act	Income-tax
Date of Order	05/10/2016
Assessment Year	2009-10
Judgment	View Judgment
Keyword Tags	tax effect
Bot Summary:	CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.32,14,720 - which was added by the AO on account of unexplained investment. In response to the notice of hearing, adjournment application was being moved from the office of Shri Pipara Co., Chartered Accountant. No power of attorney was submitted along with application. We are of the opinion that tax effect on the deletion of addition of Rs.32,14,720 - would be roughly Rs.9,60,000 -, because it is a case of an individual. In view of the latest CBDT Instruction No.21 2015 dated 10.12.2015 restricting file of the appeal by the Revenue before the Tribunal, where tax effect is below Rs.10,00,000 -, we are of the opinion that the present appeal is not maintainable. AO finds that the Tribunal has committed any error in calculating the tax effect, the Revenue will be at liberty to file an application for recall of this order. Such application should be filed within the limitation provided in the Act.

IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER . IT(SS)A.No.446 Ahd 2013 Asstt. Year: 2009-2010 DCIT, Cent.Cir.2(2) Shri Govindbhai Atmaram Dalwadi Ahmedabad. Vs 44, Yogeshwar Bungalows Gulab Tower Road Thaltej Ahmedabad 380 054. (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue by : Shri James Kurian, Sr.DR Assessee by : None Date of Hearing : 04 10 2016 Date of Pronouncement: 05 10 2016 O RDER PER RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER Revenue is in appeal against order of ld.CIT(A)-III, Ahmedabad dated 6.9.2013 for Astt.Year 2009-10. 2. Solitary grievance of Revenue is that ld.CIT(A) has erred in deleting addition of Rs.32,14,720 - which was added by AO on account of unexplained investment. 3. In response to notice of hearing, adjournment application was being moved from office of Shri Pipara & Co., Chartered Accountant. However, no power of attorney was submitted along with application. With assistance of ld.DR, we have gone through record. IT(SS)A No.446 Ahd 2013 2 4. We are of opinion that tax effect on deletion of addition of Rs.32,14,720 - would be roughly Rs.9,60,000 -, because it is case of individual. In view of latest CBDT Instruction No.21 2015 dated 10.12.2015 restricting file of appeal by Revenue before Tribunal, where tax effect is below Rs.10,00,000 -, we are of opinion that present appeal is not maintainable. However, in case ld.AO finds that Tribunal has committed any error in calculating tax effect, Revenue will be at liberty to file application for recall of this order. Such application should be filed within limitation provided in Act. 5. In result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in Court on 5th October, 2016 at Ahmedabad. Sd - Sd - (MANISH BORAD) (RAJPAL YADAV) ACCOUNTANTN MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 05 10 2016 DCIT, Cent.Cir.2(2), Ahmedabad v. Govindbhai Atmaram Dalwadi

Metadata

Judgment