INCOME TAX OFFICER-WARD-1(3), HOOGHLY, HOOGHLY vs ASIM KUMAR NANDI, HOOGHLY

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘A(SMC

Before: Shri P.M. Jagtap

This appeal is preferred by the Revenue against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XXXVI, Kolkata dated 25.10.2013, whereby he deleted the addition of Rs.33,46,000/- made by the Assessing Officer to the total income of the assessee on account of cash deposits found to be made in his Bank account by treating the same as unexplained.

I have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the relevant material available on record. As pointed out by the ld. counsel for the assessee at the outset, the tax effect involved in this appeal of the Revenue is less than the revised monetary limit fixed by the CBDT vide Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10th December, 2015 at Rs.10,00,000/- for filing the appeal by the Revenue before the Tribunal and this position ./2014 Assessment year: 2010-2011 Page 2 of 2 clearly evident from the grounds raised by the Revenue in this appeal is not disputed even by the ld. D.R. In Circular No. 21/2015 (supra) issued by the CBDT, the monetary limit for filing the appeal by the Revenue before the Tribunal has been increased to Rs.10,00,000/- and as clarified in the said Circular, the said monetary limit is applicable retrospectively even to the appeals pending before the Tribunal. The CBDT has also instructed that such pending appeals below this specified tax limit of Rs.10,00,000/- may be withdrawn/ not pressed. Keeping in view the instruction given by the CBDT vide Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10.12.2015, which is squarely applicable in the present case, the appeal filed by the Revenue in this case is treated as withdrawn/not pressed and dismissed accordingly.

INCOME TAX OFFICER-WARD-1(3), HOOGHLY, HOOGHLY vs. ASIM KUMAR NANDI, HOOGHLY