C I T JAIPUR-III JAIPUR vs. SIKAR KENDRIYA SAHKARI BANK LTD
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court held that the appeals, having a tax effect less than Rs. 20 lac, which is below the monetary limit prescribed for filing appeals before the High Court by the CBDT Circular No. 21/2015, deserved to be dismissed as not pressed. The court clarified that the substantial questions of law raised in the appeals were left open to be examined in future appropriate proceedings. The Revenue was also granted liberty to move an application for recalling the order if the appeal fell under any of the exceptions mentioned in the circular, such as constitutional validity challenges or issues relating to undisclosed foreign assets. The court directed that a copy of the order be placed in each file separately.
What were the facts?
The Rajasthan High Court heard three Income Tax Appeals (ITA-139/2015, 21/2016, 138/2002). The tax effect in these appeals was stated to be less than Rs. 20 lac. The appeals were filed against orders of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The court considered Circular No. 21/2015 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) on December 10, 2015, which revised monetary limits for filing appeals by the Revenue. This circular aimed to reduce litigation and stipulated that appeals should not be filed if the tax effect did not exceed specified limits, including Rs. 20,00,000/- before the High Court.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the appeals, with a tax effect less than Rs. 20 lac, should be dismissed in light of CBDT Circular No. 21/2015, which sets revised monetary limits for filing appeals before the High Court. Assessee's contentions: The judgment does not record specific contentions from the assessee. However, the context implies the assessee would likely support the dismissal of appeals based on the CBDT circular and the low tax effect. Revenue's contentions: The judgment does not record specific contentions from the Revenue. However, the Revenue is the appellant, and the appeals are being considered for dismissal based on the circular.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
ITA-139/2015,21/2016,138/2002 (1) In The High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Jaipur Bench, Jaipur 1. D.B.Income Tax Appeal No.139/2015. 2. D.B.Income Tax Appeal No.21/2016. 3. D.B.Income Tax Appeal No.138/2002 02.08.2016. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE J.K. RANKA HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE J.K. RANKA Mr. Sameer Jain Adv., ] Mr. Anuroop Singhi Adv., ] for appellant. Mr. Mahendra Gargieya Adv., for respondent. ***** 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/- 3 Before Supreme Court 25,00,000/-
ITA-139/2015,21/2016,138/2002 (2) 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
ITA-139/2015,21/2016,138/2002 (3) 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 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. (J.K. RANKA),J. (AJAY RASTOGI),J. VS Shekhawat Sr.P.A. VS Shekhawat Sr.P.A.
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 Larsen And Toubro Limited vs. Joint Commissioner Of Central GST And Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- T C Global INDIA Private Limited vs. Principal Commissioner Of Central GST, North DelhiDelhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Kamlasana Impex Private Limited vs. Director General Of GST Intelligence (Hq) Delhi) & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Ritu Gautam Proprietor Of Ms Heritage International vs. Additional Commissioner Central Goods And Services Tax Appeals Ii Delhi & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Sutha vs. The State Tax Officer(Inspection-3)Madras · 27 Oct 2026