ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 8, NEW DELHI vs. SC JOHNSON PRODUCTS PVT. LTD., GURUGRAM
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were not maintainable due to low tax effect, as per CBDT Circular No. 17 of 2019. The appeals were dismissed on this ground.
What were the facts?
The Revenue filed appeals against the CIT(A)'s order deleting additions made to the assessee's income for assessment years 2012-13 and 2013-14. The tax effect of the grounds raised by the Revenue was below the monetary limit prescribed by the CBDT for filing appeals.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was whether the Revenue's appeals were maintainable before the ITAT given the low tax effect, considering the monetary limits prescribed by CBDT circulars.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “G”: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA & MS. ASTHA CHANDRA
These two appeals filed by the Revenue are against the order dated 27.04.2018 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals)-42, New Delhi (“CIT(A)”) pertaining to the assessment year 2012-13 and 2013-14. 2. At the time of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that the tax effect of the grounds raised by Revenue is less than the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT for filing the appeal to which the Ld. DR conceded.
3. We have heard the Ld. Representatives of the parties and perused the material on record. On perusing 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 following reliefs given by him: i. Deletion of addition of Rs. 16,01,907 and Rs. 12,01,355 in assessment year 2012-13 and 2013-14 respectively. ii. Deletion of addition of Rs. 56,49,053 and Rs. 71,66,186 in assessment year 2012-13 and 2013-14 respectively.
4. As regards ground no. 3 in assessment year 2012-13 relating to interest under section 244A of the Act, it has been brought to our notice that the assessee has accepted the addition and paid the demand on the said ground. The Revenue inadvertently raised this ground of appeal before the Tribunal. Hence, this ground becomes infructuous.
5. We find that CBDT vide Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 had increased the limit for filing appeal before ITAT at Rs. 20 lakhs. The limit for filing appeals before ITAT and other authorities were enhanced by CBDT vide Circular No.17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019. As per the aforesaid CBDT Circular dated 08.08.2019, no Department appeals are to be filed against relief given by the Ld. CIT(A) before the ITAT unless the tax effect, excluding interest, exceeds Rs.50 lakhs.
In the instant case, the tax effect involved is less than Rs.50 lakhs in both the assessment years in dispute. In the absence of any material placed on record by the Revenue to demonstrate that the issues in the present appeals are covered by exceptions provided in para 10 of the aforesaid CBDT Circular dated 11.07.2018, we are of the view that the monetary limit prescribed by the instructions of the CDBT Circular dated 08.08.2019 would be applicable to the present appeals of the Revenue.
We, therefore, hold that the present appeals of Revenue are not maintainable on account of low tax effect. However, in case there is any error in the computation of the tax effect involved or if for any reason, the aforesaid CBDT Circular is not applicable, it would be open to the Revenue to seek revival of the appeals. Thus, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.
In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.
More judgments on Section 244A
- Shailesh Khodabhai Ramani, Rajkot vs ITO, Ward-2(1)(3), RajkotITA 366/RJT/2024[2012-13]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2012-13
- Shailesh Khodabhai Ramani, Rajkot vs ITO, Ward-2(1)(5), RajkotITA 257/RJT/2024[2011-12]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2011-12
- Credit Agricole Corporate and Investment… vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax…ITA 3453/MUM/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
- Credit Agricole Corporate and Investment… vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 6805/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Pratibha Sanjai Srivastava, Ahmedabad vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 7(2)(1), AhmedabadITA 2565/AHD/2026[2021-2022]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2021-2022
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Asian Aura vs. Government Of Nct Of Delhi And Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Shining Steel Through Its Proprietor Kartik Gupta vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Redamancy World Through Its Proprietor Sanjay Kumar Goel vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Arj Exim INDIA vs. Additional Commissioner Of CGST, Appeals-Ii, New Delhi And OrsDelhi · 27 Oct 2026
- The State Of Bihar Through The Commissioner Of State Tax vs. Kaushlendra KumarPatna · 27 Oct 2026