IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SMT. ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO S . 1244 / BANG/20 1 4 (ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 1997 - 98 ) AND ITA NOS.1245/BANG/2014 (ASSESS MENT YEARS: 1997 - 98 ) INCOME - TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, BIJAPUR . VS. APPELLANT 1. SHRI SHASHIKANT D.MAHINDRAKAR, BASAVESHWAR ROAD, BIJAPUR. 2. SHRI RAMAKANT D MAHINDRAKAR BASAVESHWAR ROAD, BIJAPUR. RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY: DR.P.K.SRIHARI, ADDL.CIT(DR) RESPONDENT BY: SHRI RAVI SHANKAR, ADVOCATE. DATE OF HEARING : 29/12/2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 29 / 12 /2015. O R D E R PER ABRAHAM P GEORGE, AM : TH ESE ARE APPEAL S FILED BY REVENUE DIRE CTED AGAINST ORDER S OF CIT (A) , BELGAUM FOR A. Y. 1997 - 98. ITA NO S . 1244 & 1245 /BANG/201 4 S/SHRI SHASHIKANT D. MAHINDRAKAR & RAMAKANT D.MAHINDRAKAR PAGE 2 OF 3 02. WHEN THE APPEALS WERE TAKEN UP FOR HEARING LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE S POINTED OUT TO THE LD. DR THAT TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN THESE APPEALS WERE LESS THAN RS.10 LAKHS FOR THE IMPUGNED A SSESSMENT YEAR S AND THEREFORE BY VIRTUE OF CIRCULAR NO.21/2015, DT.10.12.2015, WERE BELOW THE LIMITS LAID DOWN FOR FILING APPEALS BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. 03. LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT PARA 8 OF THE CIRCULAR WAS NOT APPLICABLE IN THIS CASE. THEREFORE HE D ID NO T OBJECT TO THE APPLICATION OF THE CIRCULAR. HOWEVER LD DR STATED THAT EXISTENCE OR NOT OF ANY REVENUE AUDIT OBJECTIONS LEADING TO THE FILING OF THE APPEAL NEEDED TO BE ASCERTAINED. 04. WE HAVE PERUSED THE ORDERS AND HEARD THE CONTENTIONS. PARA 4 OF THE CIRCULAR NO.21/2015 (SUPRA) IS REPRODUCED HEREUNDER : 4. FOR THIS PURPOSE, TAX EFFECT MEANS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TAX ON THE TOTAL INCOME ASSESSED AND THE TAX THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN CHARGEABLE HAD SUCH TOTAL INCOME BEEN REDUCED BY THE AMOUNT OF INCOM E IN RESPECT OF THE ISSUES AGAINST WHICH APPEAL IS INTENDED TO BE FILED (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS DISPUTED ISSUES ). HOWEVER THE TAX WILL NOT INCLUDE ANY INTEREST THEREON, EXCEPT WHERE CHARGEABILITY OF INTEREST ITSELF IS IN DISPUTE. IN CASE THE CHARG EABILITY OF INTEREST IS THE ISSUE UNDER DISPUTE, THE AMOUNT OF INTEREST SHALL BE THE TAX EFFECT. IN CASES WHERE RETURNED LOSS IS REDUCED OR ASSESSED AS INCOME, THE TAX EFFECT WOULD INCLUDE NOTIONAL TAX ON DISPUTED ADDITIONS. IN CASE OF PENALTY ORDERS, TH E TAX EFFECT WILL MEAN QUANTUM OF PENALTY DELETED OR REDUCED IN THE ORDER TO BE APPEALED AGAINST. ITA NO S . 1244 & 1245 /BANG/201 4 S/SHRI SHASHIKANT D. MAHINDRAKAR & RAMAKANT D.MAHINDRAKAR PAGE 3 OF 3 05. THE TAX EFFECT ON THE ISSUES THAT IS DISPUTED BY THE REVENUE IS LESS THAN RS.10 LAKHS FOR THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEARS. CONSTITUTIONAL VALIDITY OF AN Y PROVISIONS OF THE ACT OR RULES NOR THE LEGALITY OR VIRES OF ANY BOARD ORDER, NOTIFICATION, INSTRUCTION OR CIRCULAR WAS AN ISSUE BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. REVENUE HAS NOT BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE ANYTHING TO SHOW THAT THE APPEAL AROSE ON AN ISSUE EMANA TING FROM ANY REVENUE AUDIT OBJECTIONS ACCEPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT. ADDITION GIVING RISE TO THE APPEALS DOES NOT RELATE TO ANY UNDISCLOSED FOREIGN ASSETS / BANK ACCOUNTS. THUS WE FIND THAT THE CIRCULAR NO.21/ 2015 (SUPRA) IS SQUARELY APPLICABLE IN THIS CASE. HOWEVER IF REVENUE, AT A LATER STAGE FIND THAT APPEAL ARISE OUT OF ISSUES EMANATING FROM AUDIT OBJECTION IT WILL BE FREE TO FILE MP FOR RECALLING THIS ORDER. 06. WITH THE ABOVE OBSERVATIONS APPEAL S OF THE REVENUE ARE DI SMISSED. PRONOUN CED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 29 TH DECEMBER, 2015. S D/ - SD/ - ( SMT.ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN ) (ABRAHAM P GEORGE) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER E KSRINIVASULU ,SPS COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME - TAX APPELLATE T RIBUNAL BANGALORE