IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. SANJAY ARORA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. N. K. CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 259/ASR/2017 A SSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-II, BATHINDA [PAN: AAKHS 2874N] VS. SATISH KUMAR BANSAL, HUF, 5074, MALGODAM ROAD, BATHINDA (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SH. BHAWANI SHANKAR (D.R.) RESPONDENT BY: SH. P. N. ARORA (A DV.) DATE OF HEARING: 17.07.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 18.07.2018 ORDER PER SANJAY ARORA, AM: THIS IS AN APPEAL ARISING OUT OF THE ORDER BY THE C OMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), BATHINDA DATED 28.02.2017 ALLOWING T HE ASSESSEES APPEAL CONTESTING HIS ASSESSMENT U/S. 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ('THE ACT' HEREINAFTER) FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR (AY) 2013-14 VIDE ORDER DATED 17.02.2015. 2. WHEN THE APPEAL WAS CALLED OUT FOR HEARING, IT W AS FOUND THAT THE TAX EFFECT IS AT RS.16,07,140/-, I.E., BELOW RS.20 LACS, THE E XTANT THRESHOLD LIMIT FOR THE APPEALS BY THE REVENUE VIDE CIRCULAR NO. 03/2018 DA TED 11.07.2018 ISSUED BY THE CBDT U/S. 268A OF THE ACT. THE LD. DR CONFIRMED THE QUANTUM OF TAX EFFECT. UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE HAVE NO HESITATION IN H OLDING THAT THE REVENUES APPEAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE IN VIEW OF SECTION 268A. ITA NO. 259/ASR/2017 (AY 2013-14) SATISH KUMAR BANSAL V. DY. CIT 2 WE DECIDE ACCORDINGLY. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED IN LIMINE . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON JULY 18, 2018 SD/- SD/- (N. K. CHOUDHRY) (SANJAY ARORA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE: 18.07.2018 /GP/SR. PS. COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: (1) THE APPELLANT: THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF I NCOME TAX, CIRCLE-II, BATHINDA (2) THE RESPONDENT: SATISH KUMAR BANSAL, HUF, 5 074, MALGODAM ROAD, BATHINDA (3) THE CIT(APPEALS), BATHINDA (4) THE CIT CONCERNED (5) THE SR. DR, I.T.A.T TRUE COPY BY ORDER