VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR JH VH-VKJ-EHUK] YS[KK LNL; ,OA JH YFYR DQEKJ] U;KF; D LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI T.R.MEENA, AM & SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JM VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NOS. 950/JP/2013 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2009-10 . THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1, AJMER. CUKE VS. SMT. SUMAN SAINI, VILL & POST : KUCHIL, TEHSIL : KISHANGARH, AJMER. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO. BHVPS 4150 G VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SHRI AJAY MALIK (ADDL.CIT) FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY S BY : NONE LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 15.12.2015. ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 16/12/2015. VKNS'K@ ORDER PER SHRI LALIET KUMAR, J.M. THE PRESENT APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS ARISING FROM THE ORDER DATED 26.09.2013 PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT (A), AJMER FOR THE A.Y. 2009-10. THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL :- (1) DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 13,38,435/- ON A/C OF EXPENSES DISALLOWED, WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACTS OF THE CASE. (2) DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,37,524/- MADE BY AO ON A/C OF UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT IN CAR THOUGH THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT EXPLA INED THE SOURCE OF INVESTMENT. 2 ITA NO. 950/JP/2013 A.Y. 2009-10. ACIT VS. SMT. SUMAN SAINI, AJMER. (3) DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 71,090/- MADE BY AO ON A/C OF UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT IN HOUSE THOUGH THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT EXP LAINED THE SOURCE OF INVESTMENT. (4) DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 14,350/- MADE BY AO ON A/C OF UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT IN MOBILE THOUGH THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT EX PLAINED THE SOURCE OF INVESTMENT. 2. AFTER HEARING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND CONSIDERING THE SAME ALONG WITH ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW, WE NOTE D THAT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE RELATE TO DELETION OF ADDITION OF RS. 13,38 ,435/-, RS. 1,37,524/-, RS. 71,090/- AND RS. 14,350/- ON ACCOUNT EXPENSES DISALLOWED, UN DISCLOSED INVESTMENT IN CAR, UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT IN HOUSE AND UNDISCLOSED INV ESTMENT IN MOBILE RESPECTIVELY BY HOLDING THAT ASSESSEE HAS SUPPRESSED PROFIT. IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN THIS CASE IS LESS THAN RS. 10 LACS. WHEN THE TAX EFFECT IN THE APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT IS LESS THAN RS. 10 LACS, THEN THE SAME IS NOT MAINTAINABLE IN VIEW OF CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 21 OF 2015 (F. NO. 279/MISC.142/2007-ITJ (PT.) DATED 10.1 2.2015. 3. AS PER SECTION 268A, NOTIFICATION REFERRED HEREI N ABOVE, IF THE TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN RS. 10 LACS, THEN THE APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED BEING NOT MAINTAINABLE/PRESSED. ACCORDINGLY THE APPEAL OF TH E REVENUE /APPELLANT IS DISMISSED ON ACCOUNT OF TAX EFFECT BEING LESS THAN RS. 10 LACS. HOWEVER, THE DISMISSAL OF THE APPEAL WILL NOT BE TREATED AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDINGS NOR IT WILL BE CONSIDERED AS AN EXPRESSION ON THE MERITS OF THE CASE. THE REVENUE I S FREE TO FILE ANY OTHER APPEAL ON THE SAME ISSUE BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. 3 ITA NO. 950/JP/2013 A.Y. 2009-10. ACIT VS. SMT. SUMAN SAINI, AJMER. 4. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 16/12/2015. SD/- SD/- VH-VKJ-EHUK YFYR DQEKJ (T.R. MEENA) (LALIET KUMAR) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 16/12/2015 DAS/ VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1, AJMER. 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- SMT. SUMAN SAINI, AJMER. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY@ THE CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 950/JP/2013) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASST. REGISTRAR 4 ITA NO. 950/JP/2013 A.Y. 2009-10. ACIT VS. SMT. SUMAN SAINI, AJMER.