ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-14(1)., HYDERABAD vs. BBEL-MIPL JOINT VENTURE., HYDERABAD.
In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue. This was due to the tax effect being below the threshold limit prescribed by CBDT Circulars for filing appeals.
What were the facts?
The Revenue filed an appeal before the ITAT for Assessment Year 2010-11. The appeal was against an order passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 263 of the Income Tax Act.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was whether the appeal filed by the Revenue should be entertained given the low tax effect, as per CBDT circulars.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCHES “A”: HYDERABAD
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & LAXMI PRASAD SAHU
O R D E R PER BENCH: This appeal filed by the Revenue for AY 2010-11 is directed against CIT(A) - 6, Hyderabad’s order dated 12/04/2017 involving proceedings u/s 143(3) rws 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ; in short “the Act”.
At the time of hearing it has been brought to our notice that as per the CBDT Circulars No.03/2018 dated 11.07.2018 and Circular No.17 of 2019 dated 9 th August,
:- 2 -: BBEL-MIPL Joint Venture, Hyderabad.
2019, the tax limit for filing of appeal by the Revenue before the Tribunal has been fixed at Rs.50.00 lakhs. Since the tax effect in this appeal is less than Rs.50.00 lakhs, we are dismissing the same on account of low tax effect with the liberty to the Revenue to seek recall of the order, if any of these cases falls within the exceptions mentioned in the Circulars cited above.
In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed in above terms. Pronounced in the open court on 5th April, 2021.
More judgments on Section 263
- Gillette India Limited, Mumbai vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, JaipurITA 1316/JPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Neo Structo Construction P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The Pr. CIT- 3, AhmedabadITA 1216/AHD/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Vimal Harilal Baldania, Gandhidham vs The ITO Ward 2, GandhidhamITA 770/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1493/KOL/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1492/KOL/2026[2013-2014]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2013-2014
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Priyanshi Enterprises vs. Principal Commissioner Of CGST Delhi North And Ors.Delhi · 3 Nov 2026
- Subrat Kumar Samal vs. The Commissioner, CGST, Cx And Customs, BhubaneswarOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- Laxmipriya Biswal vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax,BhubaneswarOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- M/S Shree Jagannath Engineering,Angul vs. Assistant Commissioner, Angul Division ,AngulOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- M/S. Archana Agro, Nayagarh vs. The Chief Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes And Goods And Services Tax, CuttackOrissa · 3 Nov 2026