IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH G, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1727/DEL/2008 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 1995-96 ITO, WARD 15(2) VS. M/S RANUTROL INSTRUMENTATI ONS LTD. ROOM NO. 213, 414, NEW DELHI HOUSE, C.R. BUILDING, BARAKHAMBA ROAD, NEW DELHI - 1 I.P. ESTATE, (PAN: AAACR1597C) NEW DELHI APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SMT. SHAVETA NAKRA DUTT A, SR. DR RESPONDENT BY : SH. SHAILESH GUPTA, ADV. ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, J.M. THIS APPEAL BY THE DEPARTMENT IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 26.2.2008 OF LD. CIT(A)-XVIII, NEW DELHI PERTAININ G TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 1995-96 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- (1) IN THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE DISALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTION CLA IMED U/S. 80-O OF THE I.T. ACT ON THE BASIS OF TOTAL FOREIGN REMITTAN CE RECEIVED DURING THE YEAR, WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT THE AS SESSEE WAS MAINTAINING ITS ACCOUNTS ON THE MERCANTILE BASIS AN D THE FOREIGN REMITTANCE IN PART RELATED TO INCOME OF EARLIER YEA RS. (2) IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, T HE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED BY ALLOWING EXCESSIVE RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE. (3) THE APPELLANT CRAVES TO BE ALLOWED TO AMEND, DELETE OR ADD ANY OTHER GROUNDS OF APPEAL DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING OF T HIS APPEAL. 2 2. FROM THE ABOVE, WE FIND THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN T HE REVENUES APPEAL IS LESS THAN RS.10,00,000/-, THEREFORE, THE DEPARTMENTS AP PEAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE, IN VIEW OF THE CIRCULAR NO. 21/2015 DATED 10 TH DECEMBER, 2015 ISSUED VIDE F.NO. 279/MISC. 142/2007-ITJ (PT.) BY THE CBDT. FO R THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, THE RELEVANT PARA NOS. 3 & 10 OF THE AFORESAID CBDT S CIRCULAR ARE REPRODUCED AS UNDER:- 3. HENCEFORTH, APPEALS/ SLPS SHALL NOT BE FILED IN CASES WHERE THE TAX EFFECT DOES NOT EXCEED THE MONETARY L IMITS GIVEN HEREUNDER: S NO APPEALS IN INCOME-TAX MATTERS MONETARY LIMIT (IN RS) 1 BEFORE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 10,00,000/- 2 BEFORE HIGH COURT 20,00,000/- 3 BEFORE SUPREME COURT 25,00,000/- IT IS CLARIFIED THAT AN APPEAL SHOULD NOT BE FILED MERELY BECAUSE THE TAX EFFECT IN A CASE EXCEEDS THE MONETA RY LIMITS PRESCRIBED ABOVE. FILING OF APPEAL IN SUCH CASES IS TO BE DECIDED ON MERITS OF THE CASE. 10. THIS INSTRUCTION WILL APPLY RETROSPECTIVELY TO PENDING APPEALS AND APPEALS TO BE FILED HENCEFORTH IN HIGH COURTS/ TRIBUNALS. PENDING APPEALS BELOW THE SPECIFIED TAX LIMITS IN PARA 3 ABOVE MAY BE WITHDRAWN/ NOT PRESSED. APPEALS BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT WILL BE GOVERNED BY THE INSTRUCTI ONS ON THIS SUBJECT, OPERATIVE AT THE TIME WHEN SUCH APPEA L WAS FILED. 3. IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE THAT THE BOARDS INSTRUCTIO N OR DIRECTIONS ISSUED TO THE INCOME-TAX AUTHORITIES ARE BINDING ON THOSE AUTHORI TIES, THEREFORE, THE DEPARTMENT SHOULD HAVE WITHDRAWN/ NOT PRESSED THE P RESENT APPEAL, IN VIEW OF THE AFORESAID INSTRUCTIONS SINCE THE TAX EFFECT IN THE INSTANT APPEAL IS LESS THAN THE AMOUNT OF RS. 10 LACS, PRESCRIBED IN THE ABOVE SAID CBDTS INSTRUCTIONS. 3 4. KEEPING IN VIEW THE CBDT INSTRUCTION NO. 21/2015 DATED 10 TH DECEMBER, 2015, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE REVENUE SHOULD HA VE WITHDRAWN/ NOT PRESSED THE INSTANT APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. WE ARE ALS O OF THE VIEW THAT THE SAID INSTRUCTIONS ARE APPLICABLE FOR THE PENDING APPEALS AND APPEALS TO BE FILED HENCEFORTH IN TRIBUNAL. ACCORDINGLY, THE REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE STAN DS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 28/02/2017. SD/- SD/- (PRASHANT MAHARISHI) (H.S. SIDHU) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JU DICIAL MEMBER DATED: 28/02/2017 *SR BHATNAGAR* COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR