INCOME TAX OFFICER, INDORE vs. AASHTA DOSHI, INDORE

ITA 789/IND/2025Status: DisposedITAT Indore12 October 2026AY 2024-253 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the present appeal filed by the Revenue is not maintainable. The Tribunal observed that the disputed amount of Rs. 13,521/- is significantly below the revised monetary limit of Rs. 60 lakhs stipulated by CBDT Circular No. 9/2024 for filing appeals before the Tribunal. While the Revenue argued that the case falls under exception clause 'a' of CBDT Circular No. 05/2024, the departmental representative failed to produce any material on record to substantiate the claim of unconstitutionality during the hearing. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances, the Tribunal was of the considered opinion that the appeal filed by the Revenue is liable to be dismissed in view of the CBDT Circular dated 17.09.2024. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal without considering the merits of the case. However, it was clarified that the Revenue is at liberty to file a miscellaneous application (MA) within the period of limitation, if so advised.

What were the facts?

The Revenue has filed an appeal against the order dated 18.07.2025 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Gurugram, for the assessment year 2024-25. The assessee is Aastha Doshi. The appeal was filed by the Income Tax Officer. The dispute pertains to an amount of Rs. 13,521/-. The Tribunal noted that the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) Circular No. 9/2024 dated 17.09.2024 revised the monetary limit for filing appeals by the department before the Tribunal to Rs. 60 lakhs. The circular also states that it shall apply to pending appeals and such appeals should be withdrawn. The Revenue's representative argued that the present case falls under exception clause 'a' of CBDT Circular No. 05/2024, where any provision of the Act or rules or notification issued thereunder has been held to be constitutionally invalid.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable in light of CBDT Circular No. 9/2024, which revised the monetary limit for filing appeals to Rs. 60 lakhs, given that the disputed amount is Rs. 13,521/-? Assessee's contentions: No arguments were recorded for the assessee. Revenue's contentions: The Revenue contended that the appeal is maintainable as it falls under exception clause 'a' of CBDT Circular No. 05/2024, which pertains to cases where a provision of the Act, rules, or notification has been declared constitutionally invalid. The Revenue argued that the appeal should be decided on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 268A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर "ी परेश एम. जोशी, "या"यक सद"य तथा "ी अर"वंद सोनी, लेखा सद"य के सम" आ.अ.सं. 789/इंदौर/2025 "नधा"रण वष" : 2024-25 आयकर अ"धकार" बनाम आ"था दोशी, इंदौर 401 "ाईम "यू अपाट"म"ट, "तलक नगर, इंदौर अपीलाथ" ""यथ" "था.ले.सं.- एयूजेपीसी 3196 एल PAN- AUJPC3196L राज"व क" ओर से "ी "बनय कुमार राय, व"र"ठ "वभागीय ""त"न"ध "नधा"रती क" ओर से कोई नह"ं सुनवाई "त"थ 01.10.2026 उ"घोषणा "त"थ 12.10.2026 आदेश "ी परेश म.जोशी, "या"यक सद"य "वारा "नधा"रण वष" 2024-25 से संबं"धत राज"व "वारा दा"खल यह अपील "व"वान अ"त"र"त आयकर आयु"त (अपील)-2, गु""ाम के आदेश "दनांक 18.07.2025 के "व""ध "नदे"शत ह" ।

2.

इस अपील क" सुनवाई के दौरान, हमने पाया "क क"""य ""य" कर बोड" "वारा जार" नवीनतम प"रप" सं. 9/2024 "दनांक 17.09.2024 के "वारा "वभाग "वारा अ"धकरण के सम" अपील दा"खल करने हेतु अंत""त "व"न"हत कर सीमा को संशो"धत कर 60 लाख "कया गया है । साथ ह" उपरो"त प"रप" के प"र"छेद सं. 4 के अनुसार आयकर अ"ध"नयम क" धारा 268 ए के अधीन द" गई शि"तय" के अनुपालन म" अ"धकरण के सम" "वभाग "वारा कोई अपील दा"खल

आ.अ.सं. 789/इंदौर/2025 2 आ"था दोशी, इंदौर नह"ं क" जानी चा"हए य"द कर "भाव ". 60 लाख से अ"धक नह"ं है । इसके अ"त"र"त इस प"रप" के प"र"छेद 5, जो "न"न "प से उ"धृत है, म" यह उि"ल"खत है "क यह अनुदेश लं"बत अपील" पर भी लाग

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 accountSign 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.

More judgments on Section 268A

All 3,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 268A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →