THE PR COMMISSIONER OF IT KOTA vs. SHRI PRAKASH JOY,PROP M/S V E S
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court held that the appeal filed by the Revenue is to be dismissed as not pressed. The reasoning is based on the CBDT Circular No. 21/2015, which sets a monetary limit of Rs. 20 lac for filing appeals before the High Courts. Since the tax effect in the present case is indisputably less than Rs. 20 lac, the appeal does not meet the threshold for filing. The Court clarified that any substantial questions of law raised in the appeal are left open to be examined in future proceedings. The Revenue is also granted liberty to move an application for recalling the order if the appeal falls under any of the exceptions mentioned in the CBDT circular. The operative direction is the dismissal of the appeal as not pressed.
What were the facts?
This Indian ITAT judgment concerns an appeal filed by the Pr Commissioner of Income Tax, Kota (the Revenue) against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The appeal was filed for assessment year(s) not specified in the judgment. The key fact is that the tax effect in dispute is less than Rs. 20 lac. The Revenue's appeal is challenged based on a Circular No. 21/2015 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) dated 10.12.2015, which sets monetary limits for filing appeals. The procedural history indicates that the appeal was filed before the High Court, and the High Court is now considering its maintainability in light of the CBDT circular.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue before the High Court is maintainable given that the tax effect is less than Rs. 20 lac, as stipulated by CBDT Circular No. 21/2015? The Revenue contended that the appeal should be dismissed as not pressed due to the tax effect being below the prescribed monetary limit for High Court appeals as per CBDT Circular No. 21/2015. The Revenue did not present any arguments on the merits of the case. The judgment does not record any specific arguments from the Respondent (Shri Prakash Joy, Prop M/S V E S).
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 178 / 2016 The Pr Commissioner Of It Kota ----Appellant Versus Shri Prakash Joy,Prop M/S V E S ----Respondent _____________________________________________________ For Appellant(s) : Mrs. Parinitoo Jain _____________________________________________________ HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOVERDHAN BARDHAR Judgment 28/03/2017 Instant appeal is 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 of 3) [ITA-178/2016] S. No. Appeals in Income-tax matters Monetary Limit (in Rs.) 2 Before High Court 20,00,000/- 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
(3 of 3) [ITA-178/2016] 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 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 appeal stand dismissed as not pressed. However, appellant will be at liberty to revive the appeal in case of difficulty. (GOVERDHAN BARDHAR),J. (K.S. JHAVERI)ACTING C.J. BM Gandhi/142.
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 →- 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
- M/S.Sri Satya Sai Constructions vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- Anisha Busa vs. Sibar Institute Of Dental SciencesAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026