, A IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE S/SHRI KUL BHARAT,JM AND MANISH BORAD, AM ./ITA.NO.980/AHD/2010 ( / ASSTT YEAR : 2002-03) DCIT, ANAND CIRCLE, ANAND. VS. EMITICI ENGINEERING LTD., ANAND SOJITRA ROAD, VALLABHVIDYANAGAR. PAN :AACE464F (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY: SHRI DINESH SINGH, SR.DR / RESPONDENT BY: SHRI M. K. PATEL, AR / DATE OF HEARING 14/12/2015 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 03-02-2016 / O R D E R PER MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US AGAINST THE OR DER OF LD.CIT(A) - IV, BARODA , DATED 1.01.2010 PASSED FOR THE ASSTT.YEAR 2002-03. 2. THE GRIEVANCE OF THE REVENUE IS AS PER FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL :- 1) ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING THE DISALLOWANCE O F ELECTRICITY EXPENSES OF RS.6,50,000/- EVEN THOUGH THE MANUFACTU RING ACTIVITIES HAD STOPPED IN THE KANISHA STEEL DIVISION. AND THE BIFURCATION OF ITA.NO._980/AHD/2010 - 2 OTHER INCOME UNDER DIFFERENT HEADS DOES NOT REVEAL CREDIT ON ACCOUNT OF ELECTRICITY CHARGES COLLECTED FROM KANIS HA STEEL. 2) THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, TO AMEND OR A LTER THE ABOVE GROUNDS AS MAY BE DEEMED NECESSARY. 3. THIS APPEAL WAS PRESENTED ON 1.4.2010. ON 10.12 .2015 THE CBDT HAS ISSUED INSTRUCTIONS BEARING NO. 21/2015 PROHIBI TING ITS SUBORDINATE AUTHORITIES FROM FILING OF THE APPEAL TO THE TRIBUN AL AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) WHERE THE TAX EFFECT BY VIRTUE OF THE RE LIEF GIVEN BY THE CIT(A) IS LESS THAN RS.10 LAKHS. THE INSTRUCTIONS HAVE BEEN MADE APPLICABLE WITH RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT, MEANING THERE BY, THESE INSTRUCTIONS ARE APPLICABLE ON PENDING APPEALS ALSO. THE TAX E FFECT ON DELETION OF THIS TOTAL ADDITION WOULD BE LESS THAN RS.10 LAKHS. THE PRESENT APPEAL DESERVES TO BE DISMISSED BEING TREATED TO BE FILED IN VIOLATION OF CBDT INSTRUCTIONS. THE CASE DOES NOT FALL WITHIN THE AM BIT OF EXCEPTIONS PROVIDED IN THE INSTRUCTIONS. IT IS FURTHER OBSERV ED THAT SINCE, WHILE HEARING THE APPEAL, SUCH FACTORS WERE NOT CONSIDERE D, THEREFORE, IN CASE, ON RE-VERIFICATION AT THE END OF THE AO, IT CAME TO THE NOTICE THAT THE TAX EFFECT IS MORE OR IT FALLS WITHIN THE AMBIT OF EXCE PTIONS PROVIDED IN THE INSTRUCTION, THEN THE DEPARTMENT WILL BE AT LIBERTY TO APPROACH THE TRIBUNAL FOR RECALL OF THIS ORDER. SUCH APPLICATIO N SHOULD BE FILED WITHIN ITA.NO._980/AHD/2010 - 3 FOUR YEARS OF THIS ORDER. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, TH E APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 4. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISS ED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 3 RD FEBRUARY, 2016 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- SD/- (KUL BHARAT) JUDICIAL MEMBER (MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED, 3/02/2016 ! '!/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. $% / THE APPELLANT 2. &$% / THE RESPONDENT. 3. '(( ) * / CONCERNED CIT 4. ) * ( ) / THE CIT(A)- 5. !-. , ,012 /DR,ITAT, AHMEDABAD. 6. .3 45 / GUARD FILE. ) ' / BY ORDER, ' (0 (ASSTT.REGISTRAR) ITAT, AHMEDABAD ITA.NO._980/AHD/2010 - 4 1. DATE OF DICTATION .. : 2/2/2016 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER : 3/2/2016 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 3/2/216 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