IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH B, HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOS. 1028 & 1029/HYD/2012 ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2009-10 & 2010-11 INCOME-TAX OFFICER-TDS-1, APPELLANT WARD 3(5), TIRUPATHI. VS. THE PRINCIPAL, SREENIVASA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY & MANAGEMENT STUDIES RESPONDE NT MURAKAMBATTUR, CHITTOOR. (TAN HYDS09496E) APPELLANT BY : SMT. AMISHA S. GUPT ASSESSEE BY : NONE. DATE OF HEARING : 26/12/2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 04/01/ 2013 ORDER PER ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, J.M.: BOTH THESE APPEALS PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST A COMMON ORDER OF CIT(A), GUNTUR, DATED 08 /03/2012 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2009-10 & 2010-11. 2. THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS AP PEAL, WHICH ARE COMMON IN BOTH THE APPEALS UNDER CONSIDERATION, EXCEPT THE AMOUNTS INVOLVED: 1) THE CIT(A), GUNTUR IS ERRED IN TAKING UP THE AP PEAL WITHOUT JURISDICTION. 2) THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE MIC ROSOFT CORPORATION HAS NOT GIVEN ANY TECHNICAL AND PROFESS IONAL SERVICE TO THE ASSESSEE. 2 ITA NOS. 1028 & 1029/HYD/12 THE PRINCIPAL, SREENIVASA TECHNOLOGY & MANAGEMENT S TUDIES 3) THOUGH THE TAX EFFECT IS RS. 42,170/- IN AY 2009 -10 AND RS. 42,339/- IN AY 2010-11, WHICH ARE BELOW THE PRE SCRIBED LIMIT, THE APPEALS ARE FILED AS THE APPEALS ARE DEC IDED BY THE CIT(A) HAVING NO JURISDICTION OVER THE CASE. 3. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT-ASSESS EE AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THESE APPEALS. HOWEVER, WE PROCE ED TO DECIDE THESE APPEALS AFTER HEARING THE LEARNED DR, AS THE TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN THESE APPEALS IS LESS THAN RS. 3 LAKHS. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED DR AND PERUSED THE R ELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT, AFTER GIVING APPE AL EFFECT, THE TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN THESE APPEALS FILED BY THE R EVENUE ARE LESS THAN RS. 3 LAKHS AND THIS POSITION HAS NOT BEEN DIS PUTED EVEN BY THE LEARNED DR. AS PER THE CBDT INSTRUCTION NO. 3 O F 2011 ISSUED ON 09/02/2011, THE MONETARY LIMIT FOR FILING OF AN APPEAL BY THE DEPARTMENT BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL HAS BEEN REVISED TO RS. 3 LAKHS. AS DECIDED BY THE CBDT, APPEALS SHALL NOT BE FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT IN CASES WHERE TAX EFFECT DOES NOT EXCEE D RS. 3 LAKHS. IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MADHUKAR INAMDAR (HUF ) 318 ITR 149, THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT HAS HELD THAT CB DT INSTRUCTION FIXING ANY MONETARY LIMIT FOR FILING TH E APPEAL WOULD APPLY EVEN FOR THE PENDING CASES. KEEPING IN VIEW T HE SAID DECISION OF HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT AND T HE BOARD INSTRUCTION NO. 3 OF 2011 DATED 09/02/2011, WE HOLD THAT THE PRESENT APPEALS FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT INVOLVING T AX EFFECT OF LESS THAN RS. 3 LAKHS ARE NOT MAINTAINABLE AND THE SAME ARE, THEREFORE, DISMISSED. 4. AS WE HAVE DISMISSED THESE APPEALS AS NON-MAINTA INABLE ON THE GROUND OF TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN THEM IS LESS T HAN RS. 3 LAKHS, 3 ITA NOS. 1028 & 1029/HYD/12 THE PRINCIPAL, SREENIVASA TECHNOLOGY & MANAGEMENT S TUDIES WE ARE NOT GOING TO DECIDE THE GROUND NO.3 RAISED B Y THE REVENUE IN BOTH APPEALS REGARDING THE CIT(A) HAVING NO JURI SDICTION OVER THE CASE. 4. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE A RE DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 04/01/2013. SD/- SD/- (B.R. BASKARAN) (ASHA VIJAY ARAGHAVAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED: 4 TH JANUARY, 2013. KV COPY TO:- 1) ITO, TDS-1, WARD 3(5), RAJASVA BHAVAN, 4 TH FLOOR, VARADARAJA NAGAR, TIRUPATHI 517501. 2) THE PRINCIPAL, SREENIVASA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY & MANAGEMENT STUDIES, MURAKAMBATTUR, CHITTOOR. 3) THE CIT (A), GUNTUR. 4) THE CIT(TDS), HYDERABAD 5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, I.T.A.T., HYDERABAD