COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,RAIPUR vs. SMT.MUSKAN ROHRA

ORAL ORDER (Passed on 27"' January, 2010) PerDhirendra Mishra, J The instant appeai preferred by the appellant/revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act") against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bilaspur Bench, Camp at Raipur (in short "Tribunal") has been admitted on the following substantial question of law: "Whether in the facts and circumstances of ffiie case, the Income Tax Appellate Tsibunat was jusiified in law, in cjuashing the orefer passed under Secffon 263 and in holding that the assessmentorder was not envneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue though proper and acfeqiyate inquiry was not made by the Assessing Officer before passing assessment order?"

2- of the assessee facts. proper verification and investigation of the 4. The assessee aggrieved by the order of the CIT, preferred appeal before the Tribunal. Learned Tribunai aliowed the appeal by the irnpugned order with a finding that learned CIT was not justified in hoiding that the AO aiiowed exemption under Section 10(38) of the Act without maklng proper enquiries. and further heid that the order of the AO cannot be heid to be erroneous or prejudiciat to the interest of the revenue and the present case was not fit for invoking provisions of Sectlon 263 of the Act. Shri Rajeev Shrivastava, iearned counsei for the appeilant/'revenue, on instructions from the department, before entering into merits of the case, fairly submits that even if the order passed by teamed CIT under Section 263 is upheid, tax effect involved in this appeal is less than the minimum monetary limit of Rs.4 lac as fixed by the Central Board of Direct Taxes vide its instructions No.5/08 dated 15.5.2008, according to which for preferring appeal before the High Court, the minimum tax effect has been fixed at Rs.4 tacs.