GURVINDER SINGH,SIRSA vs. PRINCIPLE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ROHTAK

PDF · subscribers
ITA 487/CHANDI/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 July 2026AY 2018-194 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal as not maintainable due to low tax effect as per CBDT circular. The assessee's appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The revenue appealed against an order that deleted interest income on enhanced compensation. The assessee's appeal challenged the revisionary jurisdiction under section 263.

What were the issues?

Maintainability of revenue's appeal due to low tax effect and validity of revisionary jurisdiction under section 263.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 56(2)(viii),Section 263,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, CHANDIGARH

Before: HON’BLE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JM & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

For Respondent: Smt. Jai Shree Sharma (CIT) - Ld. DR

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No.1415/CHANDI/2025
ITA No.487/CHANDI/2024

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, CHANDIGARH VIRTUAL HEARING BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ ITA No.1415/CHANDI/2025 (िनधा�रणवष� / Assessment Year: 2018-19) ITO Gurvinder Singh Aaykar Bhawan, Sector – 20 Village Kurangawali, Sirsa बनाम/ Vs. Sirsa, Haryana - 125201 Haryana – 125201 �ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. DWLPS-6742-D (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (��थ� / Respondent) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ ITA No.487/CHANDI/2024 (िनधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Gurvinder Singh Pr. CIT बनाम/ Village Kurangawali, Sirsa Aaykar Bhawan, Vs. Haryana – 125201 Opp. Mansarovar Park, Rohtak- 124001 �ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. DWLPS-6742-D (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (��थ� / Respondent) Assessee by : Sh. Ankit Kumar (Advocate) – Ld. AR Revenue by : Smt. Jai Shree Sharma (CIT) - Ld. DR

सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 20-07-2026 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement 22-07-2026 : आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. The revenue is in further appeal before us against the order passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC [CIT(A)]

on 18.07.2025 for Assessment Year (AY) 2018-19 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. AO u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act on 04.02.2025. The assessment has been framed pursuant to revisionary order passed u/s 263 on 01.03.2024. In the assessment order, Ld. AO brought to tax interest received on enhanced compensation on compulsory acquisition of agricultural land u/s 56(2)(viii). However, Ld. CIT(A), deleted the same by following various judicial decisions. Aggrieved the revenue is in further appeal before us. The registry has noted delay of 31 days in the appeal which stand condoned. 2. The Ld. AR, at the outset, stated that the revenue’s appeal is not maintainable on account of CBDT Low Tax Effect Circular No.05/2024 dated 15.03.2024 as the tax effect of quantum addition as stated on Form 36 is Rs.51,53,989/-. The said position remains controverted before us. The relevant extract of the Circular read as under: - 2. In supersession of the above referred communications issued by CBDT, the following may be noted in respect of departmental appeals to be filed before ITATs and HCs and SLPs/ appeals before SC: 3.1 Monetary limits given in paragraph 4 with regard to filing appeal/SLP shall be applicable to all cases including those relating to TDS/TCS under the Act with the following exceptions where the decision to appeal/file SLP shall be taken on merits, without regard to the tax effect and the monetary limits: a. Where any provision of the Act or the Rules or notification issued thereunder has been held to be constitutionally invalid, or b. Where any order, notification, instruction or circular of the Board or the Government has been held to be illegal or ultra vires the Act or otherwise constitutionally invalid, or c. Where the assessment is based on information in respect of any offence alleged to have been committed under any other law received from any of the law enforcement or intelligence agencies such as CBI, ED, DRI, SFIO, NIA, NCB, DGGI, state law enforcement agencies such as State Police, State Vigilance Bureau, State Anti-Corruption Bureau, State Excise Department, State Sales/Commercial Taxes or GST Department, or d. Where the case is one in which prosecution has been filed by the Department in the relevant case and the trial is pending in any Court or conviction order has been passed and the same has not been compounded, or

e. Where strictures/adverse comments have been passed and/or cost has been levied against the Department of Revenue, CBDT or their officers, or f. Where the tax effect is not quantifiable or not involved, such as the case of registration of trusts or institutions under sections 10(23C), 12A/ 12AA/12AB of the Act, order passed u/s 263 of the Act etc. The reference to cases involving sections referred here, where it is not possible to quantify tax effect or tax effect is not involved, is for the purpose of illustration only. g. Where addition relates to undisclosed foreign income/undisclosed foreign assets (including financial assets)/undisclosed foreign bank account, or h. Cases involving organized tax evasion including cases of bogus capital gain/loss through penny stocks and cases of accommodation entries, or i. Where mandated by a Court's directions, or j. Writ matters, or k. Matters related to wealth tax, fringe benefit tax, equalization levy and any matter other than the Income Tax Act, or l. In respect of litigation arising out of disputes related to TDS/TCS matters in both domestic and International taxation charges:- i. Where dispute relates to the determination of the nature of transaction such that the liability to deduct TDS/TCS thereon or otherwise is under question, or ii. Appeals of International taxation charges where the dispute relates to the applicability of the provisions of a Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement or otherwise m. Any other case or class of cases where in the opinion of the Board it is necessary to contest in the interest of justice or revenue and specified so by a circular issued by Board in this regard.

No exception as enumerated hereinabove has been shown to us. Therefore, the revenue’s appeal is not maintainable in terms of said circular. In the result, the appeal stand dismissed as not maintainable in terms of above circular. However, a liberty is granted to the revenue to seek recall of the order if it is found that the issue is covered under any of the exception clause or the tax effect in the appeal exceeds the prescribed limit as provided in the Circular. 3. At this stage, Ld. AR did not press for assessee’s appeal which assails the validity of revisionary jurisdiction u/s 263. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee stand dismissed as withdrawn.

4.

The revenue’s appeal ITA No.1415/Chandi/2025 stand dismissed on low tax effect. The assessee’s appeal ITA No.487/Chandi/2024 stands dismissed as withdrawn. Order pronounced on 22nd July, 2026

-Sd- -Sd- (LALIET KUMAR) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AS Dated: 22.07.2026 आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत /Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��थ�/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु�/CIT 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड�फाईल/GF

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

ITAT CHANDIGARH

More judgments on Section 56(2)(viii)

All 364 judgments and leading authorities on Section 56(2)(viii) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →