, , , , INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL -ABENCH MUMBAI , BEFORE S/SH.RAJENDRA,ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND AMIT SHUKLA,JUDICIAL MEMBER ./I.T.A/5474/MUM/2013 , / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 INCOME TAX OFFICER-10(3)(1) MUMBAI-400 020. VS. AAREN CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD. 25-28, ATLANTA NARIMAN POINT MUMBAI-400021 PAN:AAECA 9635 M ./I.T.A/1 281 /MUM/201 4 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 200 7-08 DCIT-2(1) M.K. ROAD,MUMBAI-400 020. VS. ACE GILTS TRADING PVT. LTD. 30E, PUSHPAM BLDG, 3 RD FLOOR OFFICE NO.10, CAWASJI PATEL STREET, FORT, MUMBAI-400 001. PAN:AAECA 9929 P ( /APPELLANT ) ( / RESPONDENT ) REVENUE BY: SHRI SANDEEP GOYAL & M.MURLI ASSESSEE BY: S/SH.SATISH MODI & NONE / DATE OF HEARING: 07.03.2016 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 07.03.2016 ,1961 254(1) ORDER U/S.254(1)OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT,1961(ACT) PER BENCH - THE ABOVE APPEALS WERE FILED BY THE ASSESSING OFFIC ERS (AO.S) RAISING VARIOUS GROUNDS OF APPEAL FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS MENTIONED ABOVE.THE TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN BOTH THE CASES IS BELOW THE MONETARY LIMIT,(RS.10,00,000/-) PRESCRIBE D BY THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES (CBDT),VIDE ITS CIRCULAR NO.21/2015(F.NO.279/MISC. 142/2007-ITJ (PT.) DATED 10 TH DECEMBER, 2015. 2. AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVES(AR)FOR THE FIRST APPEAL APPEARED, WHEREAS NONE APPEARED FOR THE SECOND APPEAL,AS STATED EARLIER.THE DEPARTMENTA L REPRESENTATIVES (DR.S),ON A QUERY BY THE BENCH,FAIRLY CONCEDED THAT THE TAX INVOLVED IN BOTH THE ABOVE CASES WAS LESS THAN RS.10.00 LACS. CONSIDERING THESE FACTS,WE DISMISS T HE APPEALS HOLDING THEM AS NOT MAINTAINABLE. AS A RESULT, APPEALS FILED BY T HE ASSESSING OFFICERS STAND DISMISSED. . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 7 TH MARCH, 2016. 7 , 2016 SD/- SD/- ( ! / AMIT SHUKLA ) ( '#$ / RAJENDRA ) %& / JUDICIAL MEMBER %& / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATE: 07.03.2016 JV.SR.PS. / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 5474/M/13,1281/M/14 2 1. APPELLANT / 2. RESPONDENT / 3. THE CONCERNED CIT(A)/ , 4. THE CONCERNED CIT / 5. DR A BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI / , , . . . 6. GUARD FILE/ //TRUE COPY// / BY ORDER, / DY./ASST. REGISTRAR , /ITAT, MUMBAI.