, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, CHENNAI , . ! , ' #$ BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A. NO.1754/MDS/2013 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-2009) THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BUSINESS CIRCLE V, CHENNAI 600 034 ( %& /APPELLANT) VS M/S. SURGILABS, SAIKRIPA NO.4/15, 18 TH EAST STREET, THIRUVANMIYUR, CHENNAI 600 041. [PAN: AAHFS 6099J] ( '(%& /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI. A.V. SREEKANTH, IRS, JCIT. / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI. A.S. SRIRAMAN, ADVOCATE /DATE OF HEARING : 19.05.2015 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29.05.2015 ) / O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS APPEAL BY REVENUE IS DIRECTED AG AINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-V, CHENNAI, DA TED 03.06.2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. I.T.A.NO.1754/MDS/2013. :- 2 -: 2. IN THIS APPEAL, THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWI NG GROUNDS:- 2.1 THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN HOLDING THAT AN AMOUNT OF 11,32,082/- IS NOT TAXABLE AS DEEMED DIVIDEND U/S.2 (22)(E) IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM, ON THE BASIS OF FRESH EVIDENCE PRODUCED BEFORE HIM IN THE FORM OF LEDGE A CCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE APPEARING IN THE BOOKS OF M/S. VIBR ANT CONSULTANCY AND TRAINING PVT. LTD. 2.2. HAVING REGARD TO THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 46A OF THE I.T.RULES, THE LD. CIT(A) OUGHT T HAVE GIVEN AN OPP ORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO EXAMINE THE FRESH EVIDENCE PRODUCED BEFORE HIM FOR THE FIRST TIME. 2.3 WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE GROUND OF APPEAL , IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE DEC IDED THE IMPUGNED ISSUE ON THE BASIS OF THE HONBLE DELHI CO URTS JUDGMENT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. NATIONAL TRAVEL SER VICES (347 ITR 305). 3. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATE RIAL ON RECORD. AS SEEN FROM THE ORDER OF CIT(A), THE TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IS LESS THAN B4,00,000/- AS THE ADDITIO N TOWARDS DEEMED DIVIDEND U/S.2(22)(E) IS B11,32,082/- WHICH IS LESS THAN MONETARY LIMITS FIXED BY THE CBDT TO FILE APPEAL BY THE REVE NUE AS PER CBDT CIRCULAR NO.5/2014, DATED 10 TH JULY, 2014 WHEREIN THE MONETARY LIMIT FIXED AT B4,00,000/- TO FILE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRI BUNAL. THE LD DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT THE BOAR DS CIRCULAR NO.5/2014 ISSUED ON 10.7.2014 REVISING THE MONETARY LIMITS FOR FILING OF APPEALS BY THE DEPARTMENT BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL WI LL APPLY TO THE APPEALS FILED ON OR AFTER 10.07.2014 AND NOT TO THE APPEAL FILED PRIOR TO 10.07.2014. THUS, LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE VEHEMENTLY OPPOSED THE ARGUMENT OF THE ASSESSEE AND STATED THA T THIS INSTRUCTION I.T.A.NO.1754/MDS/2013. :- 3 -: IS PROSPECTIVE AND NOT RETROSPECTIVE. IN OUR OPINIO N, AS HELD BY THE KOLKATA BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF ITO VS. SUJIT PANDEY VIDE ORDER DATED 10.09.2014 IN ITA NO.1914(KOL)/2012, TH E CBDT INSTRUCTION NO.5/2014, DATED 10.7.2014 HAD REVISED THE MONETARY LIMIT FOR FILING AN APPEAL TO TRIBUNAL TO B4,00,000/- AND THE SAME WOULD BE APPLICABLE TO PENDING APPEALS ALSO FOR THE REASON T HAT THE SAME IS EXACTLY IDENTICAL TO EARLIER INSTRUCTIONS ISSUED BY CBDT, THEREFORE, WHERE TAX EFFECT WAS LESS THAN B4,00,000/- APPEAL W AS NOT MAINTAINABLE. BEING SO, THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES ARE PRECLUDED FROM FILING OF APPEAL IN THIS CASE ALSO. ACCORDINGLY, T HIS APPEAL IS DISMISSED AS UN-ADMITTED. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE I S DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON FRIDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF MAY, 2015, AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . ! ) V. DURGA RAO ' / JUDICIAL MEMBER ( ) (CHANDRA POOJARI) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER !' /CHENNAI. #$ /DATED:29.05.2015. KV $% &' (' /COPY TO: 1. ) APPELLANT 2. / RESPONDENT 3. * ( )/CIT(A) 4. * /CIT 5. '+, - /DR 6. ,. / /GF. I.T.A.NO.1754/MDS/2013. :- 4 -: