ITO 21(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. MR. MOHD HAI ABDULLA CHOWDHARY, MUMBAI

None appeared on behalf of the assessee; therefore, we decide this appeal ex- parte without the presence of assessee and after hearing the ld.DR.

From the fact, we find that the assessee declared return of income at Rs.2,00,922 on 19.10.2007. Thereafter, the AO framed the assessment u/s 144 by 2 3313/Mum/2014 making addition on a sundry creditor Rs.28,52,122/- and expenses of Rs.1,30,761/- and assessed the income at Rs.31,83,805/-. The First Appellate Authority deleted the addition of Rs.28,52,122/- by holding that there is no justification of treating the 30% of creditors on adhoc basis as ceased to exists. Being aggrieved by the order of ld.CIT(A), the revenue is in appeal before us.

We have heard the ld.DR and perused the material placed available before us. On perusal of the record we find that the tax effect involved in this appeal is below Rs.10 lakhs. Recently, the Central Board of Direct Taxes, has issued a Circular bearing No.21/2015 dated 10.12.2015 prescribing new monetary limit of Rs.10.00 lakhs for preferring appeal against the orders passed by Ld CIT(A) before the Tribunal. According to the above said circular, the revenue is precluded from pursuing this appeal, as the said circular has retrospective effect and is applicable to the existing appeals also. We find that the quantum in dispute is Rs.28,52,122/- and the tax effect involved therein is less than Rs.10 lakhs. Therefore, following the instruction issued by CBDT, we find that tax effect involved in this appeal is less than Rs.10 lakhs and therefore, this appeal is not maintainable. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal of the revenue being below Rs.10 lakhs.

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed.