2014 (8) TMI 962

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... vide instruction No. 3 of 2011 dated February 9, 2011 has clearly laid down that the Revenue should not prefer appeals against the assessee before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal if the tax effect involved in the appeal, excluding the interest, is less than 3 lakhs. The tax payable in the present appeal being below 3 lakhs, the Revenue s appeal is not maintainable in view of the Central Board o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ntal representative requesting for adjournment of the present appeal along with I. T. A. No. 2539/Del/2013 of the same assessee on personal grounds. 3. Learned counsel for the assessee contended that as per Central Board of Direct Taxes, Instruction No. 3 of 2011 dated February 9, 2011, the revised limit for preferring the Revenue's appeals is ₹ 3 lakhs. That the tax effect in the prese .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ction. 5. Since the Revenue's appeal is not maintainable, no useful purpose would be served by granting adjournment to the Revenue. Accordingly, the Revenue's request for adjournment is refused and the Revenue's appeal is dismissed being not maintainable. 6. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. The decision pronounced in the open court on August 29, 2014.
Case .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X