IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH C CHENNAI BEFORE DR. O.K.NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI HARI OM MARATHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 723/MDS/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, BUSINESS WARD-VI(4), CHENNAI 34. VS. M/S. MODERN ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. NO.19 AKBAR STREET, TRIPLICANE, CHENNAI 600 005. PAN AAAAM 0204 D (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) C.O. NO.70/MDS/2011 I.T.A. NO. 723/MDS/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 M/S. MODERN ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., CHENNAI 5. VS. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, CHENNAI 600 034 (CROSS-OBJECTOR) (APPELLANT-IN-APPEAL) DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI K.P. GOPAKUMAR, JCIT CROSS-OBJECTOR BY : SHRI B. SURESH, CA ITA 723 & CO 70/11 :- 2 -: O R D E R PER DR. O.K.NARAYANAN, VICE PRESIDENT THE APPEAL IS FILED BY THE REVENUE FOR THE ASSESSM ENT YEAR 2007-08, WHICH IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-IX AT CHENNAI DATED 10.1.20 11. THE APPEAL ARISES OUT OF THE ASSESSMENT COMPLETED UNDER SEC.143[3] OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961. THE CROSS-OBJECTION I S FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. 2. THE TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN THE PRESENT APPEA L IS LESS THAN ` 3 LAKHS. INSTRUCTION NO.3 OF 2011 DATED 9 TH FEB.,2011 ISSUED BY THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES, UNDER SEC.268A(1 ) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961, HAS GIVEN DIRECTIONS NOT TO F ILE APPEALS BEFORE THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL WHERE THE TAX EFFECT DOES NOT EXCEED ` 3 LAKHS. 3. THE FIRST INSTRUCTION NO.1093 DATED 28.10.1992 I SSUED BY THE BOARD, HAD LAID DOWN SUCH LIMIT AT ` 25,000/-. THEREAFTER THROUGH INSTRUCTION NO. 1979 DATED 27.3.2000, THE S AID LIMIT WAS ITA 723 & CO 70/11 :- 3 -: ENHANCED TO ` 1,00,000/-. SUBSEQUENTLY THE LIMIT WAS AGAIN INCREASED TO ` 2 LAKHS THROUGH INSTRUCTION NO.2 DATED 24.10.2005. 4. IN THE LIGHT OF THE ABOVE EARLIER INSTRUCTIONS, WHEN THE APPEALS WERE DISPOSED OF BY THE TRIBUNAL IN LIMINE ON THE GROUND OF NON-MAINTAINABILITY, ISSUES WERE TAKEN UP BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURTS. THE HON'BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE C ASE OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX V. CAMCO COLOUR CO. (254 ITR 565) HAS HELD THAT WHERE THE REVENUE EFFECT INVOLVED IN THE APPEAL IS BELOW THE PRESCRIBED LIMIT, THE APPEAL IS NOT MAINT AINABLE BEFORE THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL. THEREAFTER THE HON'BLE MADR AS HIGH COURT IN CWT VS. ANNAMALI (258 ITR 675) HELD THAT THE LIM IT PRESCRIBED IN THE LATEST INSTRUCTION IS APPLICABLE NOT ONLY TO THE APPEALS TO BE FILED AFTER THE ISSUE OF SUCH INSTRUCTIONS, BUT ALS O APPLICABLE TO THE PENDING APPEALS. THIS VIEW WAS AGAIN FOLLOWED BY T HE HON'BLE MADRAS HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF COMMISSIONER OF IN COME-TAX V. ASSOCIATED ELECTRICAL AGENCIES (295 ITR 496). THE HON'BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT ALSO HAS HELD THE SAME VIEW IN TH E CASE OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX V. PITHWA ENGG. WORKS ( 276 ITR 519) AND IN THE CASE OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VS. ZOEB Y. TOPPIWALA (284 ITR 379). ITA 723 & CO 70/11 :- 4 -: 5. THUS, THE COURTS HAVE CONSISTENTLY HELD THAT WHE RE THE TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN THE PRESCRIBED LIMIT, APPEALS A RE NOT MAINTAINABLE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AND HAVE ALSO HELD THAT THE LATEST SUCH INSTRUCTIONS ARE APPLICABLE EVEN TO THE PENDING APPEALS. 6. THEREFORE, IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE FIND THAT THIS APPEAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE BEFORE TH E TRIBUNAL. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED IN LIMINE. 7. THE CROSS-OBJECTION IS ALSO DISMISSED AS INFRUCT UOUS. ORDERS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING, ON THURSDAY, THE 21 ST DAY OF JULY, 2011 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (HARI OM MARATHA) JUDICIAL MEMBER (DR. O.K.NARAYANAN) VICE-PRESIDENT CHENNAI, DATED : 21 ST JULY, 2011 MPO* COPY TO: APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/CIT(A)/CIT/DR