Commissioner Of Income Tax Rajkot-Iii v. Raj Tea Traders....opponent(S

O/TAXAP/1226/2006 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD TAX APPEAL NO. 1226 of 2006 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH Sd/- and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.H.VORASd/-============================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see Nothe judgment ?the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ?No3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the Nojudgment ?3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the Nojudgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as Noto the interpretation of the Constitution of India or any order made thereunder ?to the interpretation of the Constitution of India or any order made thereunder ? =============================================COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX RAJKOT-III....Appellant(s) Versus RAJ TEA TRADERS....Opponent(s) ============================================= Appearance: MR PRANAV G DESAI, ADVOCATE for the Appellant(s) No. 1NOTICE UNSERVED for the Opponent(s) No. 1 ============================================= CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.H.VORA Date : 29/04/2015 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH) [1.0] Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 12.12.2005 passed by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Rajkot Bench (hereinafter referred to as “Tribunal”) in ITA No.1383/RJT/2005 for the Assessment Year 1998-99 by which the learned Tribunal has deleted the penalty imposed/penalty under section 271D of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “Act”) on the ground that cash loans/deposits have been made by the partners themselves. [2.0] It is required to be noted that the present Tax Appeal is of the year 2006 challenging the judgment and order passed by the learned Tribunal in the month of December 2005. Even the appeal has been admitted as far as back in the month of April 2007. The respondent – assessee is reported to be unserved. Till date no further steps are taken by the appellant – Revenue to serve the respondent – assessee. Even today also, the respondent – assessee is reported to be unserved due to change of address. No steps are taken to serve the unserved respondent despite sufficient time granted. [3.0] Under the circumstances, we have no other alternative but to dismiss the present tax appeal for non-prosecution. Even otherwise it is required to be noted that the amount of penalty involved in the present appeal is only Rs.59,981/-. Therefore, in view of the Instruction No.2/2005 issued by the CBDT, present Tax Appeal is required to be dismissed/not entertained on the ground of smallness of amount involved and/or amount involved is below the monetary limit for filing an appeal before the High Court i.e. less than Rs.4 lac in light of Instruction No.2/2005. [4.0] In view of the above and considering Instruction No.2/2005 with respect to the monetary limits for filing the appeal before the High Court issued by the CBDT which had come into effect with effect from 31.10.2005 and the present appeal is of the year 2006 and the amount involved is Rs.59,981/- only i.e. below the monetary limits of Rs.4,00,000/- provided for filing appeal before the High Court, present Tax Appeal is not entertained and/or dismissed on the aforesaid ground alone, however keeping the question of law open. Sd/- (M.R. SHAH, J.) Sd/- (S.H. VORA, J.) Ajay