What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal as the tax effect was below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 09/2024. The assessee's cross-objection was dismissed as not pressed.

The Revenue appealed against the deletion of an addition of Rs. 1,50,01,000 by the CIT(A). The assessee's cross-objection was not pressed.

What were the issues?

Maintainability of the Revenue's appeal due to low tax effect and the assessee not pressing its cross-objection.

ACIT vs Chinthakunta Ramesh Sridevi | ITAT Hyderabad 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD

Before: HON’BLE VIJAY PAL RAO & HON’BLE MANJUNATHA G

Pronounced: 17.06.2026

आदेश / ORDER PER VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT: This appeal by the Revenue and Cross Objection by the Assessee are directed against the Order dated 28.09.2022 of Ld. CIT(A)-12, Hyderabad, for the assessment year 2016- 17.

The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal:

“The Ld. CIT(Appeals) erred both in law and on facts of the case in granting relief to the assessee. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the Id. CIT(Appeals) failed to appreciate the findings of the AO basing on the seized material.

ITA 697/HYD/2022 And C.O.No.23/Hyd./2025 CHINTHAKUNTA RAMESH SRIDEVI, Hyd. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the Id. CIT(Appeals) failed to appreciate the fact that as per the seized document cash of Rs.1,50,01,000/- was paid by the assessee for various purposes and in the explanation offered by the assessee the stated purposes were entirely different.

On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the Id. CIT(Appeals) failed to appreciate that the assessee has failed to establish that the cash expenses mentioned in seized document were incurred by M/s. Rithwik Projects (P) Ltd and accounted for in its books.

The appellant craves leave to amend or alter any ground or add any other grounds which may be necessary.”

The only issue raised by the Revenue in the present appeal is regarding the addition made by the Assessing Officer of Rs.1,50,01,000/- which was deleted by the learned CIT(A). The Assessing Officer has given the tax effect of this issue in Form No.36 at Column no.10 as under:

ITA 697/HYD/2022 And C.O.No.23/Hyd./2025 CHINTHAKUNTA RAMESH SRIDEVI, Hyd. 3.1. Thus, the tax effect in the appeal of the Revenue is below Rs.60 lakhs which is the monetary limit prescribed by the CBDT vide Circular no.9/2024 dated 17.09.2024. Accordingly, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the tax effect in the Revenue’s appeal is below the monetary limit prescribed by the CBDT vide Circular no.09/2024 (supra). For ready reference, we reproduce the CBDT’s Circular No.09/2024 (supra) as under:

ITA 697/HYD/2022 And C.O.No.23/Hyd./2025 CHINTHAKUNTA RAMESH SRIDEVI, Hyd.

3.2. The Revenue has not disputed that the case of the department does not fall in any of the exception provided in the Circular including Circular no.5/2024 dated 15.03.2024. Hence, the present appeal of the Revenue is not maintainable having tax effect below the monetary limit provided in the Circular no.09/2024, dated 17.09.2024 and accordingly, the same is dismissed.

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

C.O.No.23/Hyd./2025 – A.Y. 2016-2017:

In the cross objection, the learned Authorised Representative of the Assessee has stated that the assessee does not press the cross objection and the same may be dismissed as not pressed.

The learned DR raised no objection if the cross objection of the assessee is dismissed as not pressed.

Accordingly, the cross objection of the assessee is dismissed being not pressed.

ITA 697/HYD/2022 And C.O.No.23/Hyd./2025 CHINTHAKUNTA RAMESH SRIDEVI, Hyd. 8. In the result, appeal ITA.No.697/Hyd./2022 of the Revenue is dismissed and Cross Objection no.23/Hyd./2025 of the Assessee is dismissed being not pressed. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files

Order pronounced in the open Court on 17.06.2025

Sd/- Sd/- MANJUNATHA G VIJAY PAL RAO ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT Hyderabad, dated 17th day of June, 2026. Copy to: ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), ROOM NO 616, 6TH 1 FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, BASHEERBAGH, HYDERABAD-500004, TELANGANA CHINTHAKUNTA RAMESH SRIDEVI, PLOT NO 1308, 2 ROAD NO 65, JUBILEE HILLS, HYDERABAD-500033, TELANGANA 3 THE PCIT-(Central Circle), Hyderabad 4 THE D.R., ITAT, A-Bench, HYDERABAD 5 GUARD FILE

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD vs. CHINTHAKUNTA RAMESH SRIDEVI, HYDERABAD

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments