, , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES H, MUMBAI , , , BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.6545/MUM/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 ACIT-16(1), 2 ND FLOOR, MATRU MANDIR, TARDEO ROAD, MUMBAI-400007 / VS. SMT. HASITA JATIN JHAVERI, FLAT NO.92, 9 TH FLOOR, KAMAL BUILDING, 69, WALKESHWAR ROAD, MUMBAI-400006 ( / REVENUE) ( !'#$ % /ASSESSEE) P.A. NO. AAEPJ7976Q / REVENUE BY MS. KUSUM BANSAL-DR !'#$ % / ASSESSEE BY SHRI NISHIT GANDHI ! & ' % ( / DATE OF HEARING : 16/09/2015 ' % ( / DATE OF ORDER: 29/09/2015 / O R D E R PER JOGINDER SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) THE REVENUE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER DAT ED 22/08/2013 OF THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, MU MBAI. THE ONLY GROUND RAISED IN THIS APPEAL PERTAINS TO T REATING THE INCOME RECEIVED ON SALE OF SHARES AS SHORT TERM CAP ITAL GAIN INSTEAD OF BUSINESS INCOME WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE CASE OF ACIT VS VEENA S. KALRA (ITA NO.2403/MUM/2012) ORDER HASITA JATIN JHAVERI ITA NO.6545/MUM/2013 2 DATED 10/07/2003, WHICH IS IN FAVOUR OF THE REVENUE . AT THE OUTSET, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, SHRI NISH IT GANDHI, CONTENDED THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN THE PRESENT APPEAL IS RS.38,630/- ONLY, THEREFORE, THE APPEAL OF THE REVE NUE IS NOT MAINTAINABLE. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. DR, MS. KU SUM BANSAL, CONTENDED THAT THE TAX EFFECT MAY BE MORE B UT BELOW THE PRESCRIBED MONETARY LIMIT. THE BENCH DIRECTED T HE LD. DR TO PRODUCE THE QUANTIFICATION OF TAX EFFECT AND ALS O STATE IF IT IS ABOVE PRESCRIBED LIMIT WITHIN A WEEK. NO COMMUN ICATION HAS BEEN RECEIVED FROM THE DEPARTMENT TO CONTRADICT THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. 2. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE NOTE T HAT AT PAGE 1 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER, THE TAX EFFECT HAS BE EN MENTIONED AT RS.38,630/- AND THE DEPARTMENT HAS NOT PRODUCED ANY EVIDENCE THAT THE TAX EFFECT IS MORE T HAN THE PRESCRIBED LIMIT, THEREFORE, WE FIND MERIT IN THE C ONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE. 2.2. IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN T HE APPEAL IS BELOW PRESCRIBED MONETARY LIMIT AS CONTAINED IN CBD T INSTRUCTION NO.3/2011 DATED 09/02/2011, FURTHER INS TRUCTION 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/COURTS AND ADVISED/DIRECTED THE DEPARTMENT NOT TO FILE APPEAL IN THE CASES WHERE THE TAX EFFECT DOES NOT EXCEED THE FOLLOWING MONETARY HASITA JATIN JHAVERI ITA NO.6545/MUM/2013 3 LIMITS, THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE IS NOT MAINTAINA BLE. THE REVISED MONETARY LIMIT IS AS UNDER:- SL. NO. APPEALS IN INCOME TAX MATTERS MONETARY LIMIT (IN RS.) 1. BEFORE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 4,00,0 00/ - 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 EF FECT IS LESS THAN RS.4,00,000/-, CONSEQUENTLY, CONSIDERING THE D ECISION FROM THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE C ASE OF PITHWA ENGINEERING WORKS (276 ITR 519) (BOM ) , THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE ARE NOT MAINTAINABLE. THEREFORE, IN VI EW OF THE ABOVE, THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED AS NOT MAINTAINABLE. FINALLY, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS 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 16/09/2015. SD/ - (RAJESH KUMAR) SD/ - (JOGINDER SINGH) '# / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER $# / JUDICIAL MEMBER & MUMBAI; * ! DATED : 29/09/2015 F{X~{T? P.S/. !.. %$&'()(*& / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : HASITA JATIN JHAVERI ITA NO.6545/MUM/2013 4 1. ,-./ / THE APPELLANT 2. 01./ / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 2 2 3% ( ,- ) / THE CIT, MUMBAI. 4. 2 2 3% / CIT(A)- , MUMBAI 5. 5 6 0%!' , 2 ,-( ,' 7 , & / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. 8# 9& / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, 15-% 0% //TRUE COPY// / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , & / ITAT, MUMBAI