, , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES D, MUMBAI , , , BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.1706/MUM/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2003-04 ITO-7(2)(1), ROOM NO.621A, 6 TH FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M. K. ROAD, MUMBAI-400020 / VS. M/S RUPAM COLOUR LAB PVT. LTD. OPP. MAHESHWARI UDYAN, KING CIRCLE, MATUNGA, MUMBAI-400019 ( / REVENUE) ( ! ' /ASSESSEE) PAN. NO. AABCR7698M C.O. NO.85/MUM/2014 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.1706/MUM/2013) ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2003-04 M/S RUPAM COLOUR LAB PVT. LTD. OPP. MAHESHWARI UDYAN, KING CIRCLE, MATUNGA, MUMBAI-400019 / VS. ITO-7(2)(1), ROOM NO.621A, 6 TH FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M. K. ROAD, MUMBAI-400020 ( ! ' /ASSESSEE) ( / REVENUE) PAN. NO.AABCR7698M ITA NO. 832/MUM/2014 DILIPKUMAR V LAKHI 2 / REVENUE BY SHRI B.S. BIST-DR ! ' / ASSESSEE BY NONE $ % ' & / DATE OF HEARING : 16/06/2016 % ' & / DATE OF ORDER: 16/06/2016 / O R D E R PER JOGINDER SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) THE REVENUE HAS FILED APPEAL AND THE ASSESSEE HAS A LSO PREFERRED CROSS OBJECTION AGAINST THE IMPUGNED ORDE R DATED 04/12/2012 OF THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, MU MBAI, FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04. 2. DURING HEARING OF THIS APPEAL, NONE WAS PRESENT FOR THE ASSESSEE IN SPITE OF ISSUANCE OF REGISTERED AD NOTICE, THEREFORE, WE HAVE NO OPTION BUT TO PROCEED EX-PART E, QUA THE ASSESSEE AND TEND TO DISPOSE OF THIS APPEAL ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. AT THE OUTSET, THE LD . DR ALSO CONTENDED THAT THE TOTAL TAX EFFECT IS BELOW PRESCR IBED MONETARY LIMIT OF RS.10 LAKH FOR FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. 2.1. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. DR AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD . IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, IT IS NOTED THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN THE PRESE NT APPEAL IS BELOW PRESCRIBED LIMIT OF RS.10 LAKH, FOR FILING TH E APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, AS CONTAINED IN CBDT INSTRUCTI ON NO.21 OF 2015, DATED 10/12/2015 (F NO.279/MISC./142/2007- IT(PT), APPLICABLE WITH RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT, WHERE IN, THE ITA NO. 832/MUM/2014 DILIPKUMAR V LAKHI 3 DEPARTMENT WAS ADVISED/DIRECTED BY THE BOARD NOT T O FILE APPEAL IN THE CASES WHERE THE TAX EFFECT DOES NOT E XCEED THE FOLLOWING MONETARY LIMIT.:- SL. NO. APPEALS IN INCOME TAX MATTERS MONETARY LIMIT (IN RS.) 1. BEFORE ITAT 10,00,000/ - 2. U/S 260 A BEFORE HONBLE HIGH COURT 20,00,000/ - 3. BEFORE HONBLE SUPREME COURT 25,00,000/ - IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE INSTRUCTION, SINCE, THE TAX EF FECT IS LESS THAN RS.10,00,000/-, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS NOT MAINTAINABLE, THEREFORE, DISMISSED. 3. SO FAR AS, THE CROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE ( CO NO.85/MUM/2014) IS CONCERNED, IT IS IN SUPPORT OF T HE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL). EVE N OTHERWISE, WE FIND THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY IS QUITE JUSTIFIED, REQUIRES NO MODIFICAT ION. THUS, THE CROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DISMISS ED. FINALLY, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE AS WELL AS THE C ROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. THIS ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF LD. DR AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING ON 16/06/2016. SD/- SD/- ( ASHWANI TANEJA ) (JOGINDER SINGH) '# / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER $# / JUDICIAL MEMBER $ MUMBAI; ( DATED : 16/06/2016 F{X~{T? P.S/. . . ITA NO. 832/MUM/2014 DILIPKUMAR V LAKHI 4 %$&'()(*& / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. *+,- / THE APPELLANT 2. ./,- / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 0 0 1' ( *+ ) / THE CIT, MUMBAI. 4. 0 0 1' / CIT(A)- , MUMBAI 5. 34 .' , 0 *+& * 5 , $ / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. 6$ / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, /3+' .' //TRUE COPY// / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , $ / ITAT, MUMBAI