, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, C BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.1283/AHD/2014 WITH CO NO.187/AHD/2014 ,- . /0./ ASSTT. YEAR: 2010-11 ITO, WARD - 2 ANAND. VS. THE ODE NAGRIK CREDIT CO - OP. SOCIETY LTD. AT & PO ODE ANAND. ( APPLICANT ) ( RESPONENT ) REVENUE BY : SHRI PRASOON KABRA, SR.DR ASSESSEE BY : WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS / DATE OF HEARING : 05/04/2017 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 05/04/2017 ; O R D E R PER RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER: REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A)-II, BARODA DATED 2.1.2014 PASSED FOR THE ASSTT.YEAR 2010-11. ON RECEIPT OF NOTICE ON REVENUES APPEAL THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED ITS CROSS-OBJECTION BEARING NO.187/AHD/2014. 2. REVENUE IS AGGRIEVED WITH THE ACTION OF THE LD.C IT(A) IN DIRECTING THE AO TO ALLOW DEDUCTION TO THE ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 80P(2) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. ITA NO.1283/AHD/2014 WITH CO 2 3. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVE R, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED ITS WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS STATING INTERALIA A PRELIMINARY OBJECTION AS TO THE MAINTAINABILITY OF REVENUES APPEAL IN VIEW OF RECE NT CBDT CIRCULAR NO.21 OF 2015 RESTRICTING FILING OF APPEAL BEFORE THE TRI BUNAL BY THE REVENUE. IT IS PLEADED THAT TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN THE PRESENT, AF TER CONSIDERING THE RELIEF GIVEN BY THE LD.CIT(A), IS RS.NIL AND THEREFORE, TH E APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS NOT MAINTAINABLE. WHEN WE CONFRONTED THE LD.DR WIT H THIS CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE, HE IS UNABLE TO CONTROVERT THE SAME. 4. WE FIND THAT THE REVENUE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL ON 1.5.2014. ON 10.12.2015 THE CBDT HAS ISSUED INSTRUCTIONS BEARING NO. 21/2015 PROHIBITING ITS SUBORDINATE AUTHORITIES FROM FILING OF THE APPEAL TO THE TRIBUNAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) WHERE THE TAX EFFEC T BY VIRTUE OF THE RELIEF GIVEN BY THE CIT(A) IS LESS THAN RS.10 LAKHS. THE INSTRUCTIONS HAVE BEEN MADE APPLICABLE WITH RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT, MEANING THEREBY, THESE INSTRUCTIONS ARE APPLICABLE ON PENDING APPEALS ALSO. IN THE PRE SENT CASE, THE ADDITION CONTESTED BY THE REVENUE IS RS.12,87,140/-, AND THE TAX EFFECT ON THIS ALLEGED ADDITION WOULD BE LESS THAN RS.10 LAKHS. THEREFORE , THE PRESENT APPEAL DESERVES TO BE DISMISSED BEING TREATED TO BE FILED IN VIOLATION OF THE ABOVE CBDT INSTRUCTION. IT IS DISMISSED. 5. IT IS FURTHER OBSERVED THAT ON RE-VERIFICATION A T THE END OF THE AO, IT CAME TO THE NOTICE THAT TAX EFFECT IS MORE OR IT FA LLS WITHIN THE AMBIT OF EXCEPTION PROVIDED IN THE INSTRUCTION, THEN THE DEP ARTMENT WILL BE AT LIBERTY TO APPROACH THE TRIBUNAL FOR RECALL OF THIS ORDER. SU CH APPLICATION SHOULD BE FILED WITHIN LIMITATION PRESCRIBED UNDER THE LAW. ITA NO.1283/AHD/2014 WITH CO 3 6. AS FAR AS CO IS CONCERNED, SUB-SECTION 4 OF SECT ION 253 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, AUTHORIZE THE RESPONDENT TO FILE CO AGAINS T ANY PART OF THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY. SUCH OBJECTION IS TO BE VERIFIED IN PRESCRIBED MANNER. A PERUSAL OF THE CO WOULD INDICATE THAT THE ASSESSE E HAS NOT SHOWN HIS GRIEVANCE AGAINST ANY PART OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER. THE CO IS IN SUPPORT OF THE LD.CIT(A)S ORDER, AND AS SUCH, CO IS NOT MAINTAINA BLE, HENCE, DISMISSED. 7. IN THE RESULT APPEAL OF THE REVENUE AND CO OF TH E ASSESSEE, BOTH ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 5 TH APRIL, 2017 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- SD/- ( MANISH BORAD ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (RAJPAL YADAV) JUDICIAL MEMBER