COMMISSIONER OF I T JAIPUR vs. GANGA BUX JAIPURIA
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court held that the appeals deserved to be dismissed as not pressed, taking into account CBDT Circular No. 21/2015 and the fact that the tax effect was less than Rs. 20 lac. The court noted that the circular applies retrospectively to pending appeals. However, it clarified that the substantial questions of law raised in the appeals, if any, were left open to be examined in future appropriate proceedings. The court also observed that if the appeal fell under any of the exceptions mentioned in the circular, the Revenue was at liberty to move an application for recalling the order. The operative direction was to dismiss the appeals as not pressed.
What were the facts?
The Rajasthan High Court was hearing two appeals filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Jaipur and Jaipur II) against orders of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal concerning the assessee, Ganga Buz Jaipuria. The tax effect in these appeals was stated to be less than Rs. 20 lac. The court noted that the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) had issued Circular No. 21/2015 on December 10, 2015, which revised the monetary limits for filing appeals by the Revenue before various judicial forums, including the High Courts, with the objective of reducing litigation. The circular stipulated that appeals should not be filed if the tax effect does not exceed Rs. 20,00,000/- before the High Court.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the appeals filed by the Revenue before the High Court are maintainable given that the tax effect is less than the prescribed monetary limit of Rs. 20,00,000/- as per CBDT Circular No. 21/2015. The Revenue contended that the appeals were filed prior to the issuance of the circular and that the circular applies retrospectively to pending appeals. The Revenue also argued that the circular's monetary limits do not apply to certain exceptions outlined in paragraph 8 of the circular, such as challenges to constitutional validity or where Board's orders are held illegal. The assessee's arguments are not recorded in the judgment. The court's decision primarily hinges on the applicability of the CBDT circular.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH JAIPUR D.B. Income Tax Appeal No.102/2002
Commissioner of IT Jaipur vs. Ganga Buz Jaipuria D.B. Income Tax Appeal No.188/2002 Commissioner of IT Jaipur II vs.Ganga Bux Jaipuria Date of Order : 6th September, 2016 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. JHAVERI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BANWARI LAL SHARMA Ms. Mahi Yadav, for the appellant. Mr. Anant Kasliwal for the respondent. 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 appeal 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/-
2 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 8. 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. 9. 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. 10. 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
3 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 less than Rs.20 lac, much less than what has been prescribed for filing appeals 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 appeal, 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. A copy of this judgment be placed in each file. (BANWARI LAL SHARMA),J. (K.S.JHAVERI),J. A.Sharma/13-14
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 →- Dwaraka Jewellers, Bhubaneswar vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S N D Waddar And Co vs. Sri Gaurav GuptaKarnataka · 30 Oct 2026
- Kanwar Enterprises Private Limited vs. The Joint Commissioner - State TaxTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Bangi Mines And Minerals vs. The State Of TelanganaTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Arka Business Solutions vs. Principal Commissioner Of CustomsTelangana · 30 Oct 2026