IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, A M I.T.A. NO. 1588/MUM/2018 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010 - 11 ) DY. CIT, CC - 3(4), CENTRAL RANGE - 3, ROOM NO. 1915, 19 TH FLOOR, AIR INDIA BLDG., NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI - 400 021 VS. SMT. HEENA N. KIKAVAT FLAT NO. 1201, D - WINDG, KUKREJA TOWERS, GARODIYA NAGAR, GHATKOPAR (E), MUMBAI - 400 077 PAN/GIR NO. AGZPK 8463 C ( APPELLANT ) : ( RESPONDENT ) APPELLANT BY : SHRI S. K. BEPARI RESPONDENT BY : SHRI ROHAN DESHPANDE DATE OF H EARING : 17.10.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 05.11 .2018 O R D E R PER S HAMIM YAHYA, A. M.: TH IS IS AN APPEAL BY THE REVENUE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 51, MUMBAI (LD. CIT(A) FOR SHORT) DATED 13.12. 2017 AND PERTAINS TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR (A.Y. FOR SHORT) 2010 - 11. 2. THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL AGAINST THE DELETION OF ADDITION BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS). THE GROUND OF APPEAL READ AS UNDER: 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A), ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.40,00,000/ - MADE BY THE A.O. ON PROTECTIVE BASIS ON ACCOUNT OF LOAN RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM M/S. SEAWOOD HOSPITALITY & REALITY PVT. LTD. (M/S. SHRPL) ON WHICH HE HAS NOT PAID A NY INTEREST AS THE A.O. HELD THAT THE LOAN IS THE SAME MONEY THAT HAS BEEN INTRODUCED AS SHARE CAPITAL AT HUGE PREMIUM IN M/S. SHRPL, WHICH WAS PROVED AS NON - GENUINE DURING THE SEARCH ACTION. 3. AT THE OUTSET, IT TRANSPIRES THAT THE TAX EFFECT OF THE RELI EF GRANTED BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) IS BELOW RS.20 LACS, AS PER THE LIMIT FIXED BY THE CBDT FOR FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE ITAT VIDE CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 3/2018, F. NO. 279/MISC.142/2007 - ITJ (PT) DATED 11 TH JULY, 2018 ISSUED BY CENTRA L BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA. 2 ITA NO. 1588/MUM/20 18 4. I HAVE GONE THROUGH THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AND THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. IT HAS BEEN FOUND THAT THE TAX EFFECTS IN THE APPEALS ARE LESS THAN RS. 20 LACS. 5. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FAIRLY AGREED TO THE ABOVE PROPOSITION THAT THESE APPEALS ARE NOT MAINTAINABLE IN LIGHT OF THE ABOVE SAID CBDT CIRCULAR. HE ALSO DID NOT POINT THAT THESE APPEALS FALL IN THE EXCEPTIONS CARVED OUT IN THE ABOVE SAID CIRCULAR. ACCORDINGLY, THESE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE STANDS DISMISSED. 6. IN THE RESULT, TH IS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 05.11.2018 SD/ - (S HAMIM YAHYA) A CCOUNTANT MEMB ER MUMBAI ; DATED : 05.11.2018 ROSHANI , SR. PS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. CIT - CONCERNED 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD F ILE BY ORDER, (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) ITAT, MUMBAI