, C IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE S/SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JM, & MANISH BORAD, AM ./ITA.NO.822/AHD/2011 ( / ASSTT YEAR : 2007-08) ACIT, VAPI CIRCLE, VAPI VS. HINAFIL INDIA LTD.,PLOT NO.1786/2, 40 SHED AREA, GIDC, VAPI PAN : AAACH 6063K (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY: MRS. SOMOGYAN PAL, SR.DR / RESPONDENT BY: NONE / DATE OF HEARING 14/12/2015 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 05-01-2016 / O R D E R PER MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US AGAINST THE OR DER OF LD.COMMISSIONER INCOME-TAX (APPEALS), VALSAD DATED 26.11.2010 PASSED FOR THE ASSTT.YEAR 2007-08. 2. THE GRIEVANCE OF THE REVENUE IS THAT THE LD.CIT( A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS.20.85.518/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNPROVED CREDITORS, WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE FACT TH AT NO CONFIRMATION OF ITA.NO.822/AHD/2011 - 2 DETAILS OF PAYMENTS MADE AFTER 31.03.2007 WERE FILE D BY THE ASSESSEE EVEN THOUGH REQUESTED FOR SPECIFICALLY. 3. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFO RE, AFTER HEARING THE LD. DR AND CONSIDERING THE MATERIAL ON RECORD, WE PROCEED TO DECIDE THE APPEAL. WE FIND THAT THIS APPEAL WAS PRESENTED ON 15.3.2011. ON 10.12.2015 THE CBDT HAS ISSUED INSTRUCTIONS BEARING NO. 21/2015 PROHIBITING ITS SUBORDINATE AUTHORITIES FROM FILING OF THE APPEAL TO THE TRIBUNAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) WHERE THE TAX EFFECT BY VIRTUE OF THE RELIEF GIVEN BY THE CIT(A) IS LESS THAN RS.10 L AKHS. THE INSTRUCTIONS HAVE BEEN MADE APPLICABLE WITH RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT , MEANING THEREBY, THESE INSTRUCTIONS ARE APPLICABLE ON PENDING APPEAL S ALSO. IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE ASSESSED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE IS OF RS. 36,15,291/-. THE ADDITION DELETED BY THE CIT(A) IS RS. 20.85.518/-. THE TAX EFFECT ON DELETION OF THIS TOTAL ADDITION WOULD BE LESS THAN RS.10 LAKHS. THE PRESENT APPEAL DESERVES TO BE DISMISSED BEING TREAT ED TO BE FILED IN VIOLATION OF CBDT INSTRUCTIONS. THE CASE DOES NOT FALL WITHIN THE AMBIT OF EXCEPTIONS PROVIDED IN THE INSTRUCTIONS. IT IS FURTHER OBSERVED THAT SINCE, WHILE HEARING THE APPEAL, SUCH FACTORS WERE NOT CONSIDERED, THEREFORE, IN CASE, ON RE-VERIFICATION AT THE END O F THE AO, IT CAME TO THE NOTICE THAT THE TAX EFFECT IS MORE OR IT FALLS WITH IN THE AMBIT OF EXCEPTIONS ITA.NO.822/AHD/2011 - 3 PROVIDED IN THE INSTRUCTION, THEN THE DEPARTMENT WI LL BE AT LIBERTY TO APPROACH THE TRIBUNAL FOR RECALL OF THIS ORDER. SU CH APPLICATION SHOULD BE FILED WITHIN FOUR YEARS OF THIS ORDER. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 4. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSE D. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 05 TH JANUARY, 2016 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- (RAJPAL YADAV) JUDICIAL MEMBER SD/- (MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED, 05/01/2016 ! '!/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. $% / THE APPELLANT 2. &$% / THE RESPONDENT. 3. '(( ) * / CONCERNED CIT 4. ) * ( ) / THE CIT(A)- 5. !-. , ,012 /DR,ITAT, RAJKOT 6. .3 45 / GUARD FILE. ) ' / BY ORDER, ' (0 (ASSTT.REGISTRAR) ITAT, AHMEDABAD ITA.NO.822/AHD/2011 - 4 1. DATE OF DICTATION .. : 5/1/2016 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER : 5/1/2016 3. OTHER MEMBER 4. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.P. S./P.S 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE D ICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR.P.S./P.S. 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK 6/1/2016 8. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER.. 10. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER