, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, AHMEDABAD , , BEFORE SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A. NO.2190/AHD/2013 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 1996-97) THE ITO, WARD-5(2) AHMEDABAD / VS. PRARTHANA CONSTRUCTION PVT.LTD. SANIDHYA-A, ANAND NAGAR BUS STOP PRAHLADNAGAR ROAD AHMEDABAD # ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AADCP 3934 A ( #& / APPELLANT ) .. ( '#& / RESPONDENT ) #&( / APPELLANT BY : MR. JAMES KURIAN, SR.DR. '#& )( / RESPONDENT BY : -NONE- *+ ), / DATE OF HEARING 15/03/2017 -./0 ), / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 20/ 03 /2017 / O R D E R PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, AM: THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-XI, AHMEDABAD [ CIT(A) IN SHORT] DATED 06/06/2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR (AY ) 1996-97. 2. THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL:- ITA NO.2190/AHD /2013 ITO VS. PRARTHANA CONSTRUCTION P LTD. ASST.YEAR 1996-97 - 2 - I) THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS ON IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF 06,87,000/- BEING AMOUNT WORKED OUT @ 1 5% OF 045.80 LACS BY WAY OF INCOME RECEIVABLE FROM ELEGA NCE PROJECT IN NATURE OF PAYMENT. II) THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELE TING THE DISALLOWANCE OF 01,40,000/- MADE BY THE A.O. OUT OF CONSULTANCY CHARGES PAID TO AUM CORPORATION BY HOLDING THAT THE EXPENSES WERE NOT TO BE INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE IN TERMS OF AGREEMENTS MADE WITH VARIOUS N.T.CS./SOCIETIES. III) THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS ON MAKI NG DELETED THE DISALLOWANCE OF 05,26,415/- OUT OF LEGAL AND PR OFESSIONAL FEES BY HOLDING THAT THE EXPENSES WERE NOT TO BE INCURRE D BY THE ASSESSEE IN TERMS OF AGREEMENTS MADE WITH VARIOUS N.T.CS./SOCIETIES. IV) ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES O THE CASE, THE LD.C OMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A) OUGHT TO HAVE UPHELD THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO THE ABOVE EXTENT. V) IT IS, THEREFORE, PRAYED THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD.C OMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A) MAY BE SET-ASIDE AND THAT OF THE ASS ESSING OFFICER BE RESTORED TO THE ABOVE EXTENT. 3. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR AN Y ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILED. 4. WE FIND THAT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS HIT BY CBDT CIRCULAR NO.21 OF 2015 DATED 10/12/2015. AS PER AFORESAID C IRCULAR, ALL PENDING APPEALS FILED BY REVENUE ARE LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED AS A MEASURE FOR REDUCING LITIGATION WHERE THE TAX EFFECT DOES NOT E XCEED THE PRESCRIBED MONETARY LIMIT OF RS.10 LAKHS. IN THE INSTANT CAS E, THE TAX EFFECT ON THE DISPUTED ISSUE RAISED BY THE REVENUE IS STATED TO B E LESS RS.10 LAKHS AND THEREFORE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS REQUIRED TO BE D ISMISSED IN LIMINE . ITA NO.2190/AHD /2013 ITO VS. PRARTHANA CONSTRUCTION P LTD. ASST.YEAR 1996-97 - 3 - 5. THE LD.DR FOR THE REVENUE FAIRLY ADMITTED THE AP PLICABILITY OF THE CBDT CIRCULAR NO.21 OF 2015. ACCORDINGLY, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED AS NOT MAINTAINABLE. HOWEVER, IT WILL BE OPEN TO THE REVENUE TO SEEK RESTORATION OF ITS APPEAL ON SHOWING INAPPL ICABILITY OF THE AFORESAID CBDT CIRCULAR IN ANY MANNER. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DI SMISSED. THIS ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 20 / 03 /2017 SD/- SD/- ( ) ( ) ( MAHAVIR PRASAD ) ( PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 20/ 03 /2017 4..*,.*../ T.C. NAIR, SR. PS !'#$#! / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. #& / THE APPELLANT 2. '#& / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 567, 8, / CONCERNED CIT 4. 8, ( ) / THE CIT(A)-XI, AHMEDABAD 5. 9:;,*67 , 67 0 , 5 / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. ;<+ / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, '9,, //TRUE COPY// / ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, AHMEDABAD