9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 1399X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts have also been made. Accordingly, disallowance was made on this account. In appeal, CIT(A) restricted the disallowance to 10% of labour expenses of ₹ 56,76,131/-. Taking all facts and circumstances, disallowance is restricted to 5% instead of 10% done by CIT(A). Assessing Officer is directed accordingly. - Decided partly in favour of assessee. - ITA No.1488/Ahd/2011, ITA No.1605/Ahd/2011 - - - Dated:- 3-1-2015 - Shailendra Kumar Yadav, JM And N S Saini, AM,JJ. For the Appellant : Shri Roopchand, Sr. DR For the Respondent : Shri P M Mehta, AR ORDER Per Shailendra Kumar Yadav,JM. These appeals of assessee and Revenue are arising out form the orders of CIT(A)-XV, Ahmedabad, dated 28.01.2010 for the assessment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 377; 4 lac. We find support from the decision of Hon ble Supreme Court dated 25.03.2011 in ITA Nos. 3 to 5/2010. Ld. Departmental Representative for the revenue submitted that Instruction no. 5/2014 is not applicable for the appeals filed prior to issue of the said instructions. It is also submitted that the Full Bench of Punjab Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Virendra Construction Co., 239 CTR 1, held that revised monetary limits are not applicable to the pending appeals, and it is in favour of the revenue. 4.1 We have heard both the sides and gone through the material available on record. Instruction No.5/2014 dated 10.07.2014 has revised the monetary limit for filing the appeal by the department before Income-tax Appellate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es of the CBDT, appeal in those cases where the tax effect is less than ₹ 10.00 lacs, are not to be entertained. This court in the case of CIT, Delhi-III Vs. M/s P.S. Jain Co., being ITA No. 179/1991 decided on 2nd August, 2010 has taken a view that such circular would also apply to pending cases. 4.3 In view of the above, Instruction no. 5/2014 dated 10.07.2014 will apply to all pending appeals. Respectfully following the precedent, it is held that the appeal is not maintainable in the instant case as the tax effect is less than ₹ 4 lacs. Accordingly, it is held that appeal filed by the revenue is not maintainable. 5. As a result, appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed. Since we dismiss Revenue s appeal on technical p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
