IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT Conducted through E-Court at Ahmedabad BEFORE SHRI S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER And SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl. ITA No(s) Assessment Appeal(s) by No(s) Year(s) Appellant vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 313/Rjt/2016 2007-08 ACIT Sh.Manojbhai Morbi Circle G.Patel Morbi 2- Pran Nagar Ravapar Road Morbi PAN:ADAPP 3356R 2. 314/Rjt/2016 2008-09 -do- -do- 3. 315/Rjt/2016 2009-10 -do- -do- 4. 316/Rjt/2016 2007-08 ACIT Sh.Manishbhai Morbi Circle G.Patel Morbi -address same- PAN:ADAPP 3353L 5. 317/Rjt/2016 2008-09 6. 318/Rjt/2016 2009-10 7. 319/Rjt/2016 2008-09 ACIT Sh. Kishorbhai Mobri Circle G.Patel Morbi -address same- PAN ADAPP 3352 M Revenue by : Shri D.R. Chhatre, Sr.DR Assessees by : Written submission Date of Hearing 21/09/2016 /Date of Pronouncement 21/09/2016 ITA No.313 to 319/RJT/2016 ACIT vs. Sh.Manojbhai G.Patel & Ors. Asst.Years 2007-08 to 2009-10 -2- ORDER PER BENCH: This bunch of captioned appeals by Revenue in case of three different assessees are directed against orders of Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-3, Rajkot dated 30/06/2016 & 15/06/2016 respectively for AYs 2007-08 to 2009-10. tabular statement of tax demand which is subject matter of appeals are noted hereunder:- Sl.No. ITA No(s). Asstt.Year Name of Amount Assessee(s) involved (Rs.) 1. ITA 2007-08 Sh.Manojbhai 2,01,082/- No.313/RJT/16 G.Patel 2. ITA 2008-09 -do- 6,56,448/- No.314/RJT/16 3. ITA 2009-10 -do- 9,43,432/- No.315/RJT/16 4. ITA 2007-08 Sh.Manishbhai 2,16,758/- No.316/RJT/16 G.Patel 5. ITA 2008-09 -do- 6,70,464/- No.317/RJT/16 6. ITA 2009-10 -do- 9,86,750/- No.318/RJT/16 7. ITA 2008-09 Sh.Kishorbhai 9,42,920/- No.319/RJT/16 G.Patel 2. All these appeals were heard together and disposed of by this common order for sake of convenience. ITA No.313 to 319/RJT/2016 ACIT vs. Sh.Manojbhai G.Patel & Ors. Asst.Years 2007-08 to 2009-10 -3- 3. Revenue has raised following common grounds of appeals:- Extracted from ITA No.313/RJT/16 for AY 2007-08 1. On facts and circumstances of case and in law, Ld.CIT(A) has erred in annulling reassessment without considering facts and circumstances of case. 2. Whether ld.CIT(A) should have not followed decision of Hon ble High Court in Tax Appeal Nos.632 to 637 of 2016 on 29/06/2016 in case of Vrundavan Ceramic Pvt.Ltd., as facts in this case are almost similar? 3. Any other ground that revenue may raise before or during proceeding before Hon ble ITAT. 4. ld.AR of assessee pointed out by way of written submissions that appeals of Revenue are not maintainable on account of low tax effect and, therefore, liable to be dismissed. ld. Sr.D.R. fairly admitted that tax effect on impugned additions in each appeal is less than limit prescribed by CBDT Circular of 10/12/2015 bearing No. 21 of 2015. 5. We have heard parties and perused materials available on record. On perusing grounds of appeal raised by Revenue, we find that Revenue is aggrieved by order of ld. CIT(A) in respect of relief given by him. As per Circular of Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) dated 10/12/2015 (Circular No. 21 of 2015), no Department appeals are to be filed against relief given by ld. CIT(A) before Income Tax Tribunal unless tax effect, excluding interest ITA No.313 to 319/RJT/2016 ACIT vs. Sh.Manojbhai G.Patel & Ors. Asst.Years 2007-08 to 2009-10 -4- exceeds Rs. 10 lacs and it further states that instructions will apply retrospectively to pending appeals also. In present case, since it is undisputed fact that on additions which are in dispute, tax effect is less than Rs. 10 lacs and in absence of any material on record pointed out by Revenue to demonstrate that issue in present appeal is covered by exemptions specified in clause (8) of aforesaid CBDT Circular, we are of view that monetary limit prescribed by instructions of aforesaid CBDT Circular would be applicable to present appeals of Department and therefore present appeals are not maintainable on account of low tax effect. In such circumstances, we dismiss all appeals of Revenue without expressing any opinion on merits of case. However, in case there is any error in computation of tax effect involved or if for any reason, aforesaid CBDT Circular is not applicable, it would be open to Revenue to seek revival of appeals. 6. In result, all appeals of Revenue are dismissed. This Order pronounced in Open Court on 21/09/2016 Sd/- Sd/- . . ( ) ( ) ( S.S. GODARA ) ( PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 21/ 09 /2016 T.C. NAIR, Sr. PS ITA No.313 to 319/RJT/2016 ACIT vs. Sh.Manojbhai G.Patel & Ors. Asst.Years 2007-08 to 2009-10 -5- Copy of Order forwarded to : 1. Appellant 2. / Respondent. 3.Concerned CIT 4. CIT(A)-3, Rajkot 5. DR,ITAT, Rajkot 6. Guard file. BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Dy. Asstt.Registrar) ITAT, Rajkot 1. Date of dictation .. 21.9.16 (covered case) 2. Date on which typed draft is placed before Dictating Member .. 21.9.16 3. Other Member... 4. Date on which approved draft comes to Sr.P.S.P.S .. 5. Date on which fair order is placed before Dictating Member for pronouncement 6. Date on which fair order comes back to Sr.P.S. P.S . 21.9.16 7. Date on which file goes to Bench Clerk 21.9.16 8. Date on which file goes to Head Clerk 9. date on which file goes to Assistant Registrar for signature on order 10. Date of Despatch of Order ACIT, Morbi Circle, Morbi v. Manojbhai G.Patel