, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,MUMBAI- C,BENCH BEFORE S/SH. RAJENDRA,ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SAKTIJIT DEY,JUDICIAL MEMBER MA NO.223/MUM/2015(ARISING OUT OF ITA/1185/MUM/2011 )-ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 INCOME TAX OFFICER-29(2)(5) C-10, R.NO.205, 1 ST FLOOR PRATYAKSHAKAR BHAVAN BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX, BANDRA (E) MUMBAI-400 051. VS M/S. PIOMA INDUSTRIES A 203, LOTUS BUILDING, WHISPERING MEADOWS, OFF BALRAJESHWAR RD. MODEL TOWN, MULUND (W) MUMBAI-82. PAN:AAAFP 3291 N ( / APPLICANT) ( / RESPONDENT) /ASSESSEE BY :NONE / REVENUE BY: SHRI SATYAPAL KUMAR (DR) / DATE OF HEARING: 15/01/2016 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT :15/01/2016 / O R D E R PER RAJENDRA, A.M. : VIDE HIS APPLICATION DATED: 5/10/2015 THE ASSESSING OFFICER (AO)HAS STATED THAT THERE WA S MISTAKE IN THE ORDER DATED,02/03/2015, PASSED BY TH E TRIBUNAL,THAT SAME WAS TO BE RECTIFIED AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 254(2)OF THE ACT,THE THE TRIBUNAL HELD THAT THE APPEAL WAS NOT MAINTAINABLE AS THE TAX EFFECT WAS BELOW THE MONETA RY LIMITS PRESCRIBED BY THE CBDT,THAT THE TAX INVOLVED IN THE APPEAL WAS MORE THAN THE SAID L IMIT. 2. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING BEFORE US,ON A QUERY B Y THE BENCH THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (DR)FAIRLY ARGUED THAT THE APPLICATI ON FILED BY THE AO HAD BECOME INFRUCTOUS IN LIGHT OF THE CIRCULAR NO. OF 2015 DATED 10.12.20 15,THAT THE TAX INVOLVED WAS LESS THAN RS.TEN LAKHS.CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCE S OF THE MATTER WE HOLD THAT THE MA FILED BY THE AO IS NOT MAINTAINABLE AND HAS TO BE REJECTE D. AS A RESULT,MA FILED BY THE AO STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONO UNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 15 TH JANUARY, 2016. 15 , 201 6 SD/- SD/- ( / SAKTIJIT DEY ) ( / RAJENDRA) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / MUMBAI, /DATE: 15.1. 2016 JV., SR.PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT / 2. RESPONDENT / MA:223/M/15-PIOMA INDUSTRIES 2 3. THE CONCERNED CIT(A)/ , 4. THE CONCERNED CIT / 5. DR A BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI / , B , . . . 6. GUARD FILE/ //TRUE COPY// / BY ORDER, / DY./ASST. REGISTRAR , /ITAT, MUMBAI.