TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (11) TMI 1242
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Revenue is directed against the order of the CIT(A)-III Pune dated 30-12-2010 on the ground of allowing the provisions claimed by the assessee. 2. At the outset of hearing, the learned Representative for the assessee raised a preliminary objection by pointing out Instruction No. 3/2011 dated 09.02.2011 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) fixing the monetary limits for filing of de....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ision, the co-ordinate Bench of ITAT Mumbai, in the case of ITO v Shri Ashok G. Dhandhariai, Mumbai in ITA No2460/Mum/2010 dated 28.2.2011 held that the revised Instructions dated 9.2.2011 (supra) are applicable to the present cases also, although such appeals have been filed on a prior date. 4. In view of the precedent brought out by the learned Representative for the respondent, factually the d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e decision in the case of Chhajer Packaging & Plastics Pvt. Ltd. it has been held as follows: 'Otherwise also, paragraph of this circular itself saves certain appeals from being obstructed due to financial limits. Paragraph 3 reads: 'The Board has also decided that in cases involving substantial question of law of importance as well as in cases where the same question of law will repeatedly aris....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nder the exception clause under the CBDT Circular and was not obstructed by the monetary limit of ₹ 3 lakhs prescribed by the Circular. Therefore the case of 300 ITR 180 is inapplicable to the facts of our case. Further Instruction No. 5 dt. 15.5.2008 fixing the monetary limit at ₹ 2 lakhs is similar to that of Instruction No. 3 dated 9.2.2011 which the assessee has brought to our noti....