COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX KOT vs. M/S ZENITH COMMERCIAL AGENCIES
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court held that the instant appeals, where the tax effect was indisputably less than Rs. 20 lac (the prescribed limit for High Court appeals), deserved to be dismissed as not pressed, in light of CBDT Circular No. 21/2015. The court noted that this circular, issued under Section 268A(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, aimed to reduce litigation by setting monetary limits for filing appeals. While acknowledging that certain exceptions (like constitutional validity challenges or adverse rulings on Board's circulars) might allow appeals despite low tax effect, the court found that the general rule of dismissal for low tax effect applied here. The court explicitly stated that the substantial questions of law raised in these appeals were left open to be examined in future proceedings if they arose. The Revenue was granted liberty to move an application for recalling the order if the appeal fell under any of the exceptions mentioned in the circular. Consequently, all appeals were dismissed as not pressed.
What were the facts?
The judgment concerns a batch of 52 Income Tax Appeals (ITAs) filed by various Commissioners of Income Tax (Revenue) against different assessees, including M/s. Zenith Commercial Agencies, M/S. Triveni Pharma, Ajmer, and M/s. Mount Shivalik Ltd. The appeals were filed between 2004 and 2014. The High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jaipur Bench was hearing these appeals. A key fact is that the tax effect in all these appeals was brought to the court's notice as being less than Rs. 20 lac. The court's decision was rendered on August 26, 2016.
What were the issues?
The primary issue before the High Court was whether the appeals filed by the Revenue should be entertained given that the tax effect in each case was less than the monetary limit prescribed for filing appeals before the High Court. This issue hinges on the applicability and interpretation of CBDT Circular No. 21/2015, dated December 10, 2015, which revised the monetary limits for filing appeals. The court had to consider if the appeals fell under any exceptions provided in the circular that would allow them to be contested on merits despite the low tax effect. The Revenue's contention would be to press for the appeals to be heard on merits, while the assessees would likely argue for dismissal based on the circular's monetary limits. The court also had to decide whether to dismiss the appeals as not pressed or to leave the substantial questions of law open for future consideration.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
JUDGMENT --------- Instant appeals are directed against order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and indisputably the tax effect as brought to our notice, is less than Rs.20 lac. A Circular No.21/2015 has been issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes dated 10.12.2015 in exercise of its power u/sec. 268A (1) of the Income-tax Act 1961 in supersession of the Boards instruction No.5/2014 dt.10.7.2014 regularising the monetary limits for filing the appeals by the Revenue before the Tribunal, High Courts and Apex Court with an object for reducing litigation. Relevant para nos.3, 8, 9 and 10 reads ad infra :- “3. Henceforth, appeals/SLPs shall not be filed in cases where the tax effect does not exceed the monetary limits given hereunder :- S. No. Appeals in Income-tax matters Monetary Limit (in Rs.) 1 Before Appellate Tribunal 10,00,000/- 2 Before High Court 20,00,000/-
-7- S. No. Appeals in Income-tax matters Monetary Limit (in Rs.) 3 Before Supreme Court 25,00,000/- It is clarified that an appeal should not be filed merely because the tax effect in a case exceeds the monetary limits prescribed above. Filing of appeal in such cases is to be decided on merits of the case. 4. xxx xxx xxx 5. xxx xxx xxx 6. xxx xxx xxx 7. xxx xxx xxx
Adverse judgments relating to the following issues should be contested on merits notwithstanding that the tax effect entailed is less than the monetary limits specified in para 3 above or there is no tax effect: (a) Where the Constitutional validity of the provisions of an Act or Rule are under challenge, or (b) Where Board's order, Notification, Instruction or Circular has been held to be illegal or ultra vires, or (c) Where Revenue Audit objection in the case has been accepted by the Department, or (d) Where the addition relates to undisclosed foreign assets/bank accounts.
The monetary limits specified in para 3 above shall not apply to writ matters and direct tax matters other than Income tax. Filing of appeals in other Direct tax matters shall continue to be governed by relevant provisions of statute & rules. Further, filing of appeal in cases of Income Tax, where the tax effect is not quantifiable or not involved, such as the case of registration of trusts or institutions under section 12 A of the IT Act, 1961, shall not be governed by the limits specified in para 3 above and decision to file appeal in such cases may be taken on merits of a particular case.
This instruction will apply retrospectively to pending appeals and appeals to be filed henceforth in High Courts/Tribunals. Pending appeals below the specified tax limits in para 3 above may be withdrawn/not pressed. Appeals before the Supreme Court will be governed by the instructions on this subject, operative at the time when such appeal was filed.” The extract of the paragraphs referred to supra, clearly indicates that the limits specified in para 3 may not apply to certain exceptions specified in para 8, at the same time para nos.9 and 10 of the Circular if read conjointly, clearly envisages that the present instructions will apply retrospectively to all the pending appeals and appeals to be filed henceforth in High Courts/Tribunals, subject to exceptions where the tax effect even if is less than Rs.20 lac, can be preferred in High Courts. Taking note of the CBDT Circular dt. 10/12/2015 and the tax effect which indisputably in the instant case is -8- less than Rs.20 lac, much less than what has been prescribed for filing appeal before the High Courts, deserves to be dismissed as not pressed. However, it is made clear that the substantial questions of law raised in the instant appeals, if any, are left open to be examined in an appropriate proceeding, if arises in future. At the same time we consider it appropriate to observe that if the appeal falls in any of the exceptions as referred to in the Circular dt. 10/12/2015, the Revenue will be at liberty to move an application for recalling of the order if so advised. Accordingly, in the light of the CBDT Circular dated 10.12.2015 the appeals stand dismissed as not pressed. Let a copy of this order be placed in each file separately.
(Ajay Rastogi),J. (K.S. Jhaveri),J. Brijesh
More judgments on Section 268A
- Income Tax Officer, Ajmer vs Hemant Kumar Sharma, AjmerITA 1506/JPR/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Income Tax Officer, Indore vs Aashta Doshi, IndoreITA 789/IND/2025[2024-25]Status: Disposed12 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Income Tax Officer Ward -1(2)(3), Ahmedabad vs Khushal Madhavlal Darji, AhmedabadITA 82/AHD/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed25 Sept 2026AY 2022-23
- Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Mehsana vs Hemantkumar Faljibhai Chaudhary, MehsanaITA 475/AHD/2025[2012-13]Status: Disposed25 Sept 2026AY 2012-13
- Dy. CIT-4(1), Indore vs Kiran Bajpai, IndoreITA 426/IND/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed9 Sept 2026AY 2024-25
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of Hte Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of The Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of The Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- 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
