9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 2037X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d it further states that the instructions will apply retrospectively to the pending appeals also. In the present case, since it is an undisputed fact that on the additions which are in dispute, the tax effect is less than Rs. 20 lakhs and in the absence of any material placed on record by the Revenue to demonstrate that the issue in the present appeal is covered by exceptions provided in para 10 of the aforesaid CBDT Circular, monetary limit prescribed by the instructions of the aforesaid CBDT Circular would be applicable to the present appeal of the Department. We therefore hold the present appeal of Revenue to be not maintainable on account of low tax effect - grounds of the Revenue are dismissed. Additions have been made in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue, we find that Revenue is aggrieved by the order of ld. CIT(A) in respect of the relief given by him. As per the recent announcement of Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) dated 11.07.2018 (Circular No. 3 of 2018), no Department appeals are to be filed against relief given by ld. CIT(A) before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal unless the tax effect, excluding interest, exceeds Rs. 20 lakhs and it further states that the instructions will apply retrospectively to the pending appeals also. In the present case, since it is an undisputed fact that on the additions which are in dispute, the tax effect is less than Rs. 20 lakhs and in the absence of any material placed on record by the Revenue to demons ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the incorrect findings in relation to Possession of money and therefore his order based on such conclusion is baseless, arbitrary and against law. 4. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the assessment order despite of the fact that appellant has discharged primary and positive burden of proof by furnishing circumstantial evidences, documentary evidences, name of witnesses and money delivered itself. 5. That the CIT(A) has erred in reaching the conclusions without examining the considering the evidences and witnesses and without giving any opportunity of being heard and of cross examination or re-examination of the witnesses of the case to the appellant and therefore, his ord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itted that when the appeal in the case of Shri Ajit Pramod Jogi (supra) has been dismissed, the present appeal in the case of assessee does not stand as the additions have been made on protective basis. 9. Ld. D.R. did not object to the aforesaid contention made by the Ld. A.R. but however supported the order of lower authorities. 10. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. It is an undisputed fact that additions have been made on protective basis in the case of assessee whereas the substantive additions have been made in the case of Shri Ajit Pramod Jogi. We, while deciding the appeal of Shri Ajit Pramod Jogi, have here-in-above dismissed the appeal of Revenue in Shri Ajit Pramod Jogi s case. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
