VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M.: This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 21/01/2018 of CIT (A)-1, Jaipur for the assessment year 2009-10. The Revenue has raised sole ground of appeal, which is as under:

Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A)-1 was justified in quashing the assessment order without considering the case on merit and without appreciating the factual matrix at the time out of issuance of notice U/s 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961

2. At the time of hearing, the ld. AR of the assessee has raised an objection of maintainability of the appeal of the Revenue due to the tax effect not exceeding Rs. 20 lacs as per the CBDT Circle No. 3 of 2018 dated 11 th July,

2018. The ld. A/R submitted that in the facts of the present case, tax effect in ITA No. 401/JP/2018 ITO Vs. Shalu Devi Agarwal Revenues appeal is stated to be Rs. 15,74,900/- on the addition of Rs 71,90,130/- which is below the prescribed limit of Rs 20 lacs.

3. The ld. D/R has fairly submitted that the tax effect involved in the Revenues appeal is less than 20 lacs which is prescribed threshold limit in terms of the CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11 th July, 2018 issued in supersession of its earlier Circular No. 21 of 2015 dated 10.12.2015.

4. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the materials available on record. It is observed that the demand/ tax effect in the Revenues appeal in question is below Rs. 20.00 lacs. Under the powers vested by section. 268A(1) of the I T Act, CBDT has recently issued Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11 th July, 2018 (F No. 279/Misc. 142/2007-ITJ(Pt) instructing the authorities below that departmental appeal should not be filed before ITAT where the demand/tax effect does not exceed Rs. 20 lacs. The circular is specifically mentioned to be applicable for all pending appeals.

5. Subject to some exceptions, it is further directed by CBDT that all the departmental appeals pending before ITAT where the demand/tax effect is not exceeding than 20 lacs should be either withdrawn or not pressed by the departmental representatives.

6. The present appeal is not covered by any exceptions mentioned in the said CBDT circular. Since the tax demand in dispute in this departmental appeal is below the limit set out by CBDT for the appeal, the appeal of the assessee is not maintainable in view of CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018 dated ITA No. 401/JP/2018 ITO Vs. Shalu Devi Agarwal

11.07.2018. Accordingly the appeal of the Department is dismissed as not pressed/withdrawn.

7. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 27/07/2018. Sd/- Sd/- fot; iky jko foe flag ;kno (Vijay Pal Rao) (Vikram Singh Yadav) U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 27 th July, 2018 *Ranjan vknsk dh izfrfyfi vxzsfkr@Copy of the order forwarded to:

1. vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- The ITO, Ward 1(5), Jaipur.

2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- Smt. Shalu Devi Agarwal, Jaipur.

3. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT

4. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT(A)

5. foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k] vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k]t;iqj@DR, ITAT, Jaipur

6. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No. 401/JP/2018) vknskkuqlkj@ By order, lgk;d iathdkj@Asst. Registrar