, , , , , ,, , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES E, MUMBAI , , BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI SANJAY ARORA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.6427/MUM/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 A SST . C OMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3((3), ROOM NO.609, 6 TH FLOOR, AAYKAR BHAWAN, M.K.ROAD, MUMBAI - 400020 / VS. M/S SAVLANI TRADING INVESTMENT PVT. LTD. 86, FREE PRESS HOUSE, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI-400021 ( # / REVENUE) ( $%& /ASSESSEE) P.A. NO.AAACS7796L # ' ( ' ( ' ( ' ( / REVENUE BY : SHRI LOVE KUMAR - DR $%& ' ( ' ( ' ( ' ( / // / ASSESSEE BY) SHRI ANUJ KISHNADWALA ' &) / / / / DATE OF HEARING : 14 /01/2015 *+, ' &) / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 14 /01/2015 DATE OF ORDER : - - - - ' &) / 20 /01/2015 - - - - / / / / O R D E R PER JOGINDER SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) : THE REVENUE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATE D 26/06/2012 OF THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, MU MBAI . THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- M/S SAVLANI TRADING INVESTMENT PVT. LTD. 2 I. WHETHER THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE C ASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APP EALS) WAS JUSTIFIED IN ALLOWING THE BUSINESS EXPENSES TO THE ASSESSEE OF RS.7,63,007/- AND DEPRECIATION OF RS.2,18,617/- WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT DU RING THE YEAR THERE WAS NO BUSINESS ACTIVITY OF THE ASSE SSEE COMPANY EXCEPT THE RECEIPT ON ACCOUNT OF RENTAL INC OME, DIVIDEND INCOME, INTEREST INCOME AND CAPITAL GAIN. II. THE APPELLANT PRAYS THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) ON THE ABOVE GROUND BE SET ASIDE AND THAT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER BE RESTORED. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, LD. DR, SHRI LOVE KUMAR, CONTENDED THAT THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY ALLOWED BUSI NESS EXPENSES TO THE ASSESSEE ALONGWITH DEPRECIATION, IGNORING TH E FACTS AND ALSO WITHOUT ASSIGNING ANY VALID REASON. THE ASSESS MENT ORDER WAS DEFENDED. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. COUNSEL F OR THE ASSESSEE, SHRI ANUJ KISHNADAWALA, AT THE OUTSET, CH ALLENGED THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE BY CONTENDING THAT THE TAX EF FECT IN THE PRESENT APPEAL IS BELOW PRESCRIBED MONETARY LIMIT. THE LD. COUNSEL ALSO FILED CALCULATION OF TAX EFFECT WHICH WAS CALCULATED AT RS.3,03,322/-. THIS FACTUAL MATRIX WAS NOT CONT ROVERTED BY THE REVENUE. 2.1. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND P ERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IN VIEW OF THE ASSER TION OF THE LD. COUNSEL THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN THE APPEAL IS BELOW PRESCRIBED MONETARY LIMIT AND CBDT INSTRUCTION NO.3/2011 DATED 09/02/2011, FURTHER INSTRUCTION NO.5/2014(F NO.279/ MISC./ 142/2007-IT(PT) DATED 10/07/2014, THE CBDT REVISED THE MONETARY LIMIT FOR FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE VARIOUS AUTHORITIES/COURT AND ADVISED/DIRECTED THE DEPARTME NT NOT TO M/S SAVLANI TRADING INVESTMENT PVT. LTD. 3 FILE APPEAL IN THE CASES WHERE THE TAX EFFECT DOES NOT EXCEED THE FOLLOWING MONETARY LIMITS:- SL. NO. APPEALS IN INCOME TAX MATTERS MONETARY LIMIT (IN R S.) 1. BEFORE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 4,00,000/- 2. U/S 260 A BEFORE HIGH COURT 10,00,000/- 3. BEFORE SUPREME COURT 25,00,000/- AS PER THE AFORESAID INSTRUCTION, THE DEPARTMENT IS NOT TO FILE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL WHEREIN THE TAX EFF ECT IS LESS THAN RS.4,00,000/-, CONSEQUENTLY, CONSIDERING THE DECISI ON FROM THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF PI THWA ENGINEERING WORKS (276 ITR 519) (BOM ) , THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS NOT MAINTAINABLE, THEREFORE, DISMISSED. THIS ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF LD. REPRESENTATIVES FROM BOTH SIDES AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING ON 14/01/2015. SD/ - (SANJAY ARORA) SD/ - (JOGINDER SINGH) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI; . DATED : 20/01/201 5 F{X~{T? P.S/. .. - ' 0&1 21,& - ' 0&1 21,& - ' 0&1 21,& - ' 0&1 21,&/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. 34 / THE APPELLANT 2. 0534 / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 6 ( ) / THE CIT, MUMBAI. 4. 6 / CIT(A)- , MUMBAI 5. 189 0& , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. 9:$ ; / GUARD FILE. - - - - / BY ORDER, 51& 0& //TRUE COPY// < << // /= # = # = # = # (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , , , , / ITAT, MUMBAI