VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHE S,B JAIPUR JH FOT; IKY JKO] U;KF;D LNL; ,O A JH FOE FLAG ;KNO] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM M A NO. 08/JP/2019 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 299/JP/2018) FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z @ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 THE ITO, WARD-2(2), ALWAR. CUKE VS. SMT. NAVITA JALAN, 318-A, DLF, PHASE-4, HAMILTON COURT, GURGAON, HARYANA. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO. ACEPJ 3068 K VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI NONE JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SHRI A.S. NEHRA (ACIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 24/05/2019 ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 24/05/2019. VKNS'K@ ORDER PER VIJAY PAL RAO, J.M. BY WAY OF THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION THE REVENU E IS SEEKING RECALLING OF THE ORDER DATED 28.08.2018 OF THIS TRI BUNAL WHEREBY THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE WAS DISMISSED DUE TO LOW TAX EFFECT NOT EXCEEDING RS. 20,00,000/-. 2. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. DR AND CAREFULLY PERUSED T HE RECORD. SINCE, NONE HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE-RESPONDENT, THEREFORE WE DO NOT HAVE PRIVILEGED TO CONSIDER THE STAND OF THE ASSESSEE. I N THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION THE REVENUE HAS STATED THAT THE CASE OF THE REVENUE FALLS IN THE 2 MA NO. 08/JP/2019 ITO VS. SMT. NAVITA JALAN EXCEPTION PROVIDED IN PARA 10(E) OF THE CIRCULAR NO . 3/2018. WE FIND THAT THE ADDITION WAS MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAIN ED CREDIT ENTRIES IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS DISALLOWANC E OF DEDUCTION U/S 80C OF THE ACT WHICH WAS CHALLENGED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). THE LD. CIT(A) QUASHED THE REASSESSMENT ORDER AND CONSEQUEN TLY DELETE THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO. ON FURTHER APPEAL THE TRIBUNAL NOTE D THE TAX EFFECT IN THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS LESS THAN THE LIMIT PROVID ED IN CIRCULAR NO. 3/2018 AND CONSEQUENTLY THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE WAS DISM ISSED IN LIMINE. NOW THE REVENUE HAS CONTENDED IN THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICAT ION THAT THIS CASE FALLS IN THE EXCEPTION PROVIDED IN PARA 10(E) OF THE CIRCULA R NO. 3/2018 WHICH READS AS UNDER:- WHERE ADDITION IS BASED ON FORMATION RECEIVED FRO M EXTERNAL SOURCES IN THE NATURE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES SUCH AS CBI/ED/DRI/SFIO/DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF GST INTELLIG ENCE (DGFI). HOWEVER, WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MAD E THE ADDITION ONLY ON THE BASIS OF THE BANK DETAILS OF THE ASSESSEE AND D ISALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTION U/S 80C OF THE ACT AS THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PRODUC E ANY EVIDENCE IN RESPECT OF RS. 45,000/-. BOTH THESE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE A O WHICH WERE SUBJECT MATTER OF THE APPEAL ARE NOT BASED ON INFORMATION R ECEIVED FROM LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES AS GIVEN IN PARA 10(E) OF THE CIRCULAR NO. 3/2018. 3 MA NO. 08/JP/2019 ITO VS. SMT. NAVITA JALAN THEREFORE, IT IS APPARENT THAT THE CASE OF THE REVE NUE DOES NOT FALLS IN THE EXCEPTION PROVIDED IN PARA 10(E) OF THE CIRCULAR NO . 3/2018. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IS DI SMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 24/05/2019. SD/- SD/- FOE FLAG ;KNO FOT; IKY JKO (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) ( VIJAY PAL RAO ) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 24/05/2019. SANTOSH/ VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- ITO, WARD-2(2), ALWAR. 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- SMT. NAVITA JALAN, GURGAON, HARYANA . 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE {MA NO. 08/JP/2019} VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASST. REGISTRAR