IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES B, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI D. MANMOHAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 103/HYD/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, KHAMMAM VS SMT. ESWARAPRAGADA USHA RANI, KHAMMAM [PAN: AADPE0308G] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR REVENUE : SHRI L. RAMJI RAO, DR FOR ASSESSEE : SHRI S. RAMA RAO, AR DATE OF HEARING : 23-08-2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 23-08-2017 O R D E R PER D. MANMOHAN, VICE-PRESIDENT: THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORD ER PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)- VIJAYAWADA AND IT PERTAINS TO THE AY. 2009-10. WHEN THE CASE WAS LAST POSTED FOR HEARING, THE LD. COUNSEL, APPEARING FOR THE ASSES SEE, SUBMITTED THAT AS PER THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL, THE TAX EFFECT IS LES S THAN RS. 10 LAKHS. LD.DR SOUGHT ADJOURNMENT AND MADE EFFORTS TO CR OSS VERIFY THE SAME. IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER (AO) H AD ADDRESSED A LETTER TO THE CONCERNED COMMISSIONER, WHEREIN HE HAS ADMITTED THAT THE TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN RS. 10 LAKHS. I.T.A. NO. 103/HYD/2013 :- 2 - : 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS DT. 13- 04-2017, ACCORDING TO WHICH, THE TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN RS. 10 LAKHS. FOR IMMEDIATE REFERENCE, THE SAME IS EXTRACTED BELOW: THE ABOVE MENTIONED APPEAL IS FILED BY THE REVENUE . IN THE SAID APPEAL, THE DEPARTMENT CONTESTED THE RELIEF GRANTED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX ON ACCOUNT OF THE FOLLOW ING: S. NO PARTICULARS OF RELIEF GRANTED BY CIT(A) AMOUNT OF RELIEF RATE OF TAX TAX 01 EXEMPTION U/S. 54F OF THE I.T. ACT (AS PER THE CONSEQUENTIAL ORDER) RS. 36,92,346 LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN @20% RS.7,38,469 02 DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENDITURE RS. 6,81,630 30% RS. 2,04,489 TOTAL: RS. 9,42,958 THE APPELLANT HUMBLY SUBMITS THAT THE HON'BLE ITAT , CHENNAI BENCH-A, IN THE CASE OF ACIT VS. R. VISWANATHAN IN ITA NO. 30/MDS/2011 HELD THAT THE TAX DOES NOT INCLUDE SURC HARGE OR EDUCATION CESS. SIMILAR VIEW IS TAKEN BY THE HON'BLE ITAT BE NCH-B, HYDERABAD IN THE CASE OF ITO VS. P. PRASEN KUMAR IN ITA NO. 418/ HYD/2014 WHEREIN IT IS HELD THAT SURCHARGE AND EDUCATION CESS SHOULD NO T BE INCLUDED WHILE CALCULATING THE TAX EFFECT. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE APPELLANT SUBMITS THAT T HE TAX EFFECT IN THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT IS LESS THAN RS. 10 LAKHS AND , THEREFORE, APPROPRIATE ORDERS MAY KINDLY BE PASSED. 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE MATTER. THE CBDT VIDE CIRCU LAR NO. 21/2015 DATED 10 TH DECEMBER, 2015, BEARING F.NO.279/- MISC.142/2007-ITI(PT) HAS SPECIFIED THAT WHERE THE TAX EFFECT DOES NOT EXCEED THE MONETARY LIMIT SPECIFIED THEREIN, THE CO NCERNED AUTHORITY HAS TO WITHDRAW ITS APPEAL OR IT NEED NOT PRES S THE SAME. THE ABOVE CIRCULAR WAS SPECIFICALLY MADE APPLICABLE TO ALL PENDING APPEALS. IN THE PRESENT CASE, TAX EFFECT ON ACCOUNT OF THE RELIEF GRANTED BY THE CIT(A), WHICH LED TO THE FILING OF THE PR ESENT APPEAL BY THE REVENUE, IS LESS THAN RS.10 LAKHS. I.T.A. NO. 103/HYD/2013 :- 3 - : 4. IN THE LIGHT OF THE CIRCULAR DATED 10-12-2015, ISS UED BY THE CBDT IN EXERCISE OF THE POWERS CONFERRED IN IT BY SUB SECTION (1) OF SECTION 268A, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE APPEAL FILED H EREIN SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE. HAVING REGAR D TO THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE DISMISS THE APPEAL OF TH E REVENUE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 23 RD AUGUST, 2017 UPON CONCLUSION OF HEARING SD/- SD/- (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) (D. MANMOHAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT HYDERABAD, DATED 23 RD AUGUST, 2017 TNMM COPY TO : 1. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, KHAMMAM. 2. SMT. ESWARAPRAGADA USHA RANI, 10-2-116, MAMILLAGUDEM, KHAMMAM. 3. CIT (APPEALS)-VIJAYAWADA. 4. CIT-VIJAYAWADA. 5. D.R. ITAT, HYDERABAD. 6. GUARD FILE.