Khushroo N. Dhunjibhoy , Mumbai vs Department Of Income Tax

ी राजे , लेखा सद य SHRI RAJENDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.5384/MUM/2013 नधा रण वष /Assessment Year 2010-11 The ACIT,CC-47, बनाम/ Shri Khushroo N. Dhunjibhoy, R.No.658,6 t h Floor, IMROZ,6-A, Mount Pleasant Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai 400006 Road, Mumbai -20

थायी ले खा सं . /जीआइआर सं . /PAN/GIR No. : ACUPD9009Q

(अपीलाथ /Appellant) .. ( यथ / Respondent)

Appellant by Shri Asghar Zain Respondent by None सनु वाई क तार"ख / Da te o f Hearing : 25/05/2015 घोषणा क तार"ख /Date of Pronouncement : 25/05/2015

आदे श / O R D E R

PER I.P.BANSAL, J.M:

This is an appeal filed by the Revenue and it is directed against order passed by Ld.CIT(A)-38, Mumbai dated 20/05/2013 for assessment year 2010-

11. Grounds of appeal read as under:

1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Id. CIT(A) erred in treating the rental income as 'Agricultural income' without appreciating the fact that the assessee has not substantiated the fact that the land was put to use for agricultural activity.

2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Id. CIT(A) erred in treating the rental income as 'Agricultural income' without appreciating the fact 2 आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.5384/MUM/2013 नधा रण वष /Assessment Year 2010-11

that the agreement between the assessee who is the Director of the lessee company and the Company is only a lease agreement and the assessee's income is in the form of Rent.

3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Id. CIT(A) erred in treating the rental income as 'Agricultural income' without appreciating the exact meaning of "Agricultural income" as per sec 2(1A) of the I.T.Act. 1961.

The appellant prays that the order of the CIT(A) on the above ground be set aside and that of Assessing Officer be restored. .

2. During the course of hearing it was noticed that the tax effect as written on the first page of order of Ld. CIT(A) was only a sum of Rs.2,30,314/-. Ld. DR did not controvert this position as he admitted that the tax would be only a sum of Rs.2,30,314/-. Therefore, not going into the merits of the appeal, we dismiss the appeal on account of low tax effect. According to CBDT Instruction No35/2011(F.No.279/MISC.142/2007-ITJ ] dated 09/02/2011 the tax effect limit for filing the appeal before the Tribunal is Rs.3.00 lacs. And the present appeal is filed on 5/08/2013.

3. In this view of the situation, we dismiss the appeal filed by the Revenue on account of low tax effect as per aforementioned instruction issued by CBDT.

Order pronounced in the open court on 25/05/2015 आदे श क घोषणा खुले यायालय म) *दनांकः 25/05/2015 को क गई ।

Sd/- Sd/- ( राजे , / RAJENDRA) (आय.पी. बंसल / I.P. BANSAL) लेखा सद य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER या यक सद य / JUDICIAL MEMBER मंब ु ई Mumbai; *दनांक Dated 25/05/2015 3 आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.5384/MUM/2013 नधा रण वष /Assessment Year 2010-11

आदे श क त ल प अ!े षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant 2. यथ / The Respondent. 3. आयकर आयु.त(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 4. आयकर आयु.त / CIT

5. /वभागीय त न1ध, आयकर अपील"य अ1धकरण, मुंबई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai

6. गाड फाईल / Guard file.

आदे शानुसार/ BY ORDER, स या/पत त //True Copy// उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, मुंबई / ITAT, Mumbai व. न.स./Vm, Sr. PS