IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL E BENCH, MUM BAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JM AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM ./ I.T.A. NO. 3909/MUM/2012 & ./ I.T.A. NO. 3910/MUM/2012 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2000-02) ASST. C.I.T. 17(1) 1 ST FLOOR, R. NO.113, PIRAMAL CHAMBERS, LALBAUG, PAREL, MUMBAI. / VS. M/S SUMANGAL ARTECH 172, MMGS BLDG., MMGS MARG, DADAR(E), MUMBAI-14 ./ ./PAN/GIR NO. AAAFS 3316B ( /APPELLANT ) : ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI J. SARAVANAN / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI HARI S RAHEJA / DATE OF HEARING : 16/12/2015 !'# / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 08/01/2016 $% / O R D E R PER RAJESH KUMAR, A. M: THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 14.03.2012 OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-29, MUMBAI (HE REINAFTER CALLED AS THE CIT(A) ) FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02. THE REVENUE H AS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL IN ITA NO.3909/M/2012 IS AS UNDER. 2 ITA NO.3909&3910/MUM/2012 ASST. C.I.T. VS M/S SUMANGAL ARTECH 1. WHETHER ON THE FACT AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF TH E CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DIRECTING AO TO TREAT THE E XPENDITURE AS REVENUE EXPENDITURE AGAINST THE CAPITAL EXPENDITURE. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.16, 50,000/- MADE BY AO WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT EXPENDITURE CLAIM ED WAS OF CAPITAL IN NATURE. THE REVENUE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUND OF APPEAL I N ITA NO.3910/M/2012 IS AS UNDER. 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.17, 30,000/- MADE BY AO WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT EXPENDITURE CLAIM ED WAS OF CAPITAL IN NATURE. 2. AT THE OUTSET THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE POINTED OUT THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN THIS APPEAL IS BELOW RS.10.00 LAKHS AND FURTHER SUBMITTE D THAT IN VIEW OF THE CBDT CIRCULAR NO.21/2015, DATED 10.12.2015 BROUGHT OUT BY THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY OF FI NANCE AND GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, THE APPEAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE AND BE DISMIS SED. THE LD. DR ALSO AGREED TO THE SUBMISSION OF THE LD. AR. 3 ITA NO.3909&3910/MUM/2012 ASST. C.I.T. VS M/S SUMANGAL ARTECH 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. WE FIND FROM THE CIRCULAR NO 21/2015 DATED 10 TH DECEMBER, 2015 THAT NO APPEALS SHOULD BE FILED BY THE REVENUE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL WHICH HAS TAX EFFECT OF RS. 10.00 LACS OR LESS AND THIS CIRCULAR IS EFFECTIVE R ETROSPECTIVELY. THE RELEVANT EXTRACT THE SAID CBDT CIRCULAR (SUPRA) IS EXTRACTED AS UNDE R:- THIS INSTRUCTION WILL APPLY RETROSPECTIVELY TO PEN DING APPEALS AND APPEALS TO BE FILED HENCEFORTH IN HIGH COURTS/TRIBUNALS. PENDI NG APPEALS BELOW THE SPECIFIED TAX LIMITS IN PARA 3 ABOVE MAY BE WITHDRA WN/NOT PRESSED. APPEALS BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT WILL BE GOVERNED BY THE IN STRUCTIONS ON THIS SUBJECT, OPERATIVE AT THE TIME WHEN SUCH APPEAL WAS FILED. 4. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE R EVENUE, WHEREIN THE TAX EFFECT IS BELOW THE ABOVE STATED TAX LIMIT OF RS.10 LAKHS, IS DISMISSED AS NOT MAINTAINABLE. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 8 TH JANUARY, 2016 SD/- SD/- (SAKTIJIT DEY) (RAJESH KUMAR) &' $ / JUDICIAL MEMBER $ / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( ) MUMBAI; *$ DATED : 08.01.2016 PS. ASHWINI GAJAKOSH 4 ITA NO.3909&3910/MUM/2012 ASST. C.I.T. VS M/S SUMANGAL ARTECH / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3. + ( ) / THE CIT(A) 4. + / CIT CONCERNED 5. ./0 ''12 , 12# , ( ) / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. 045 6 / GUARD FILE / BY ORDER, / !'# (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) #$ %, ( ) / ITAT, MUMBAI