, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A (SMC) BENCH : CHENNAI . , [BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT M EMBER ] ./I.T.A. NO.1513/MDS/2017 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-2008 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON CORPORATE WARD 15(5) CHENNAI 600 034. VS. M/S. WIN POWER ENGINEERING NO.30, LAKSHMI NAGAR, GERUGAMBAKKAM, CHENNAI 602 101. [PAN AAAFW 5667K] ( !' / APPELLANT) ( #$!' /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI. SAGADEVAN, IRS, JCIT. /RESPONDENT BY : NONE /DATE OF HEARING : 23-08-2017 !' /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 28-08-2017 % / O R D E R REVENUE IN THIS APPEAL IS AGGRIEVED THAT THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) DELETED AN ADD ITION OF A10,17,376/- MADE BY THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER U/S. 36(1) (VII) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT). ITA NO.1513/MDS/2017. :- 2 -: 2. GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE STATE THAT CBDT CIRCU LAR NO.21/2015, DATED 10 TH DECEMBER, 2015 DOES NOT APPLY SINCE REVENUE AUDIT OBJECTION WAS ACCEPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT. WH EN BENCH ENQUIRED WITH THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE W HAT WAS THE REVENUE AUDIT OBJECTION, LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENT ATIVE REPLIED THAT HE WAS UNABLE TO PLACE HANDS ON THE OBJECTION. SIN CE REVENUE IS UNABLE TO SHOW HOW IT FELL UNDER THE EXEMPTION SET OUT IN CIRCULAR NO.21/2015, I AM OF THE OPINION THAT THE APPEAL CA NNOT SURVIVE. HOWEVER, IF THE REVENUE ABLE TO FIND THE REVENUE AUDIT OBJECTIONS IF ANY, IN FUTURE, IT CAN FILE A PETITION FOR RECALLI NG THE ORDER. 3. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE STANDS DISMISS ED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON MONDAY, THE 28 TH DAY OF AUGUST , 2017, AT CHENNAI. SD/- ( . ) (ABRAHAM P. GEORGE) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER #$ / CHENNAI %& / DATED:28TH AUGUST, 2017 KV &' ()*) / COPY TO: 1 . / APPELLANT 3. +,- / CIT(A) 5. )./ 0 / DR 2. / RESPONDENT 4. + / CIT 6. /12 / GF