ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. FARIDABANU FARIDMIYA SHAIKH, AHMEDABAD

ITA 380/AHD/2026Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 October 2026AY 2019-202 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee had submitted that the tax effect, including surcharge and education cess, was Rs. 45,78,072, which was below the monetary limit for filing appeals by the Revenue before the ITAT. The Senior Departmental Representative for the Revenue fairly conceded this point and withdrew the appeal. The Assessing Officer also clarified that the case did not fall under any of the exception clauses of CBDT Circular No. 09/2024. Consequently, the Tribunal held that the appeal filed by the Revenue was not maintainable due to the low tax effect and the absence of any exceptional circumstances. The ratio decidendi is that appeals filed by the Revenue below the prescribed monetary limits, without falling under any exceptions, are liable to be dismissed. The operative direction was to dismiss the appeal of the Revenue as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The Revenue, represented by the ACIT, filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) against the order of the CIT(A) dated 31.12.2025. The appeal pertained to Assessment Year 2019-20. During the hearing, the assessee, Faridabanu Faridmiya Shaikh, submitted that the tax effect, including surcharge and education cess, amounted to Rs. 45,78,072, which was below the monetary limit for filing appeals by the Revenue before the ITAT. The Assessing Officer, after verification, clarified via email dated 06/08/2026 that the case did not fall under any exception clauses of CBDT Circular No. 09/2024 dated 17-09-2024.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable before the ITAT, considering the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limit for filing appeals, as per CBDT Circular No. 09/2024. Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the tax effect in the present case is Rs. 45,78,072, which is below the monetary threshold for filing an appeal before the ITAT. The assessee relied on the monetary limits prescribed by the CBDT for filing appeals. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue, through its Senior Departmental Representative, conceded that the appeal was indeed below the tax effect threshold. The Revenue also clarified that the case did not fall under any of the exception clauses of CBDT Circular No. 09/2024.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “A” BENCH

Before: Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha & Shri Tapas Ram Misra

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kshatriya, A.R

For Respondent: Shri Amit Pratap Singh, Sr. D.R, Shri Anil Kshatriya, A.R

PER TAPAS RAM MISRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

The present appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Ahmedabad (hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”), dated 31.12.2025 in respect of Assessment Years 2018-19 and 2019-20 passed under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”). The Revenue’s appeal before us relates to only Asst. Year 2019-20. I.T.A No. 380/Ahd/2026 A.Y. 2019-20 Effect including Surcharge and

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free account Sign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →