PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -2 CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MALA BUILDERS PVT LTD SCO 98,99 SUB CITY CENTRE SEC 34-A CHD
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court found force in the submissions of the Assessee and dismissed the appeals. The Court noted that Circular No. 3/18 clearly provides a monetary limit of ₹50,00,000/- for filing departmental appeals before the High Court. The cumulative tax effect in all the appeals before the Court was ₹14,18,277/-, which is substantially below this limit. The Court found no support for the Revenue's contention in Clause 5 of the Circular, stating that it requires the tax effect to be calculated separately for each assessment year and that appeals can only be filed for years where the tax effect exceeds the monetary limit, unless it's a composite order involving more than one year where an appeal is filed for a year exceeding the limit. The Court, referencing the Supreme Court's decision in CIT v. Dhanalekshmi Bank Ltd., dismissed the appeals due to the low tax effect without going into the merits, leaving the question of law open for adjudication in an appropriate case. The dismissal was clarified not to be an affirmation of the Tribunal's order on merits.
What were the facts?
The appeals were filed by the Pr. Commissioner of Income-Tax-2, Chandigarh (Revenue) against M/s Mala Builders Pvt. Ltd. (Assessee). The appeals concerned assessment years ranging from 2004-05 to 2008-09. The core issue revolved around the maintainability of the appeals before the High Court based on the monetary limits prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 3/18 dated July 11, 2018. The tax effect for each assessment year was provided, with the total tax effect across all appeals amounting to ₹14,18,277/-. The Revenue contended that the appeals were maintainable despite the tax effect being below the ₹50 lakh threshold for High Court appeals, citing Clause 5 of the Circular regarding composite orders. The Assessee argued that the total tax effect was below the prescribed limit and the Circular clearly stipulated the ₹50 lakh threshold for High Court appeals.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the appeals filed by the Revenue are maintainable before the High Court, considering the monetary limit prescribed for filing appeals before the High Court in Circular No. 3/18 of the CBDT, pursuant to Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Assessee's contentions: The Assessee argued that the total tax effect involved in all the appeals (₹14,18,277/-) is significantly less than the prescribed monetary limit of ₹50,00,000/- for filing appeals before the High Court as stipulated in Circular No. 3/18. Therefore, the appeals are not maintainable. Revenue's contentions: The Revenue contended that Clause 5 of Circular No. 3/18 allows for filing appeals in respect of all assessment years, even if the tax effect is less than the prescribed monetary limit in some years, if a composite order involves more than one assessment year and common issues, and an appeal is decided to be filed for a year where the tax effect exceeds the limit. The Revenue relied on this clause to argue for the maintainability of their appeals.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No.472 of 2017
Date of decision:14.8.2018
Pr. Commissioner of Income-Tax-2, Chandigarh
..... Appellant
VERSUS
M/s Mala Builders Pvt. Ltd.
..... Respondent
ITA No.473 of 2017
Pr. Commissioner of Income-Tax-2, Chandigarh
..... Appellant
VERSUS
M/s Mala Builders Pvt. Ltd.
..... Respondent
ITA No.485 of 2017
Pr. Commissioner of Income-Tax-2, Chandigarh
..... Appellant
VERSUS
M/s Mala Builders Pvt. Ltd.
..... Respondent
ITA No.486 of 2017
Pr. Commissioner of Income-Tax-2, Chandigarh
..... Appellant
VERSUS
M/s Mala Builders Pvt. Ltd.
..... Respondent
KAMAL DEEP SEHRA 2018.09.06 17:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court. Chandigarh
ITA No.472 of 2017
-2-
ITA No.504 of 2017
Pr. Commissioner of Income-Tax-2, Chandigarh
..... Appellant
VERSUS
M/s Mala Builders Pvt. Ltd.
..... Respondent
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN
Present: Ms.Urvashi Dhugga, Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant(s) Mr.Divya Suri, Advocate for the respondent.
AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J.
This order shall dispose of a bunch of five appeals, namely, ITA Nos.472, 473, 485, 486 and 504 of 2017 as common question of law and facts are involved in these appeals. For brevity, the facts are being taken from ITA No.472 of 2017. 2.
To adjudicate the issue regarding jurisdiction revolves around the maintainability of appeal before this Court on the cut-off monetary limits prescribed in Circular No.3/18 issued on 11.7.2018 by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. The relevant extract of the aforesaid Circular is reproduced as under: “Subject: Revision of monetary limits for filing of appeals by the Department before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, High Courts and KAMAL DEEP SEHRA 2018.09.06 17:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court. Chandigarh
ITA No.472 of 2017 -3- SLPs/appeals before Supreme Court-measures for reducing litigation-Reg. Reference is invited to Board's Circular No. 21 of 2015 dated 10.12.2015 wherein monetary limits and other conditions for filing departmental appeals (in Income-tax matters) before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, High Courts and SLPs/ appeals before Supreme Court were specified. 2. In supersession of the above Circular, it has been decided by the Board that departmental appeals may be filed on merits before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and High Courts and SLPs/ appeals before Supreme Court keeping in view the monetary limits and conditions specified below. 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/SLPs in Income- tax matters Monetary limit (Rs. 1. Before Appellate Tribunal 20,00,000 2. Before High Court 50,00,000 3. Before Supreme Court 1,00,00,000
It is clarified that an appeal should not be filed merely because the tax effect in a case exceeds the monetary KAMAL DEEP SEHRA 2018.09.06 17:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court. Chandigarh
ITA No.472 of 2017 -4- limits prescribed above. Filing of appeal in such cases is to be decided on merits of the case. Xxxx xxxx
xxxx
xxxx” 3.
The `tax effect’ for the assessment years involved in the present appeals is given below: Sr.No. ITA No. Assessment year Tax effect 1. 472 2008-09 `1,90,134/- 2. 473 2006-07 `1,84,463/- 3. 485 2005-06 `2,99,431/- 4. 486 2007-08 `1,63,377/- 5. 504 2004-05 `5,80,872/- Total `14,18,277/-
Learned counsel for the revenue submitted that vide the composite impugned order dated 23.8.2016 passed by the - Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh, though the ‘tax effect’ involved is not `50 lacs, however, the appeals filed by the revenue(s) are very much maintainable before this Court in view of the clause 5 of the aforesaid Circular which is in the following terms: “The Assessing Officer shall calculate the tax effect separately for every assessment year in respect of the disputed issues in the case of every assessee. If, in the case of an assessee, the disputed issues arise in more than one assessment year, appeal can be KAMAL DEEP SEHRA 2018.09.06 17:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court. Chandigarh
ITA No.472 of 2017 -5-
filed in respect of such assessment year or years in which the tax effect in respect of the disputed issues exceeds the monetary limit specified in para 3. No appeal shall be filed in respect of an assessment year or years in which the tax effect is less than the monetary limit specified in para 3. In other words, henceforth, appeals can be filed only with reference to the tax effect in the relevant assessment year. However, in case of a composite order of any High Court or appellate authority, which involves more than one assessment year and common issues in more than one assessment year, appeals shall be filed in respect of all such assessment years even if the tax effect is less than the prescribed monetary limits in any of the year(s), if it is decided to file appeal in respect of the year(s) in which tax effect exceeds the monetary limit prescribed. In case where a composite order/judgement involves more than one assessee, each assessee shall be dealt with separately.” 5.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the assessee(s) submitted that in case the entire ‘tax effect’ involved in the present appeals is calculated, even then it would
KAMAL DEEP SEHRA 2018.09.06 17:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court. Chandigarh
ITA No.472 of 2017
-6-
be less than the cut-off monetary limit prescribed i.e. `50 lakhs. Moreover, the aforesaid Circular specifically provides that the cut-off limit prescribed for filing the appeal before the High Court by the revenue is `50 lakhs. Thus, the appeals would not be maintainable. 6.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we find force in the submissions of learned counsel for the assessee(s). 7.
The aforesaid Circular clearly provides that the departmental appeals may be filed on merits before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and the High Courts and SLPs/appeals before the Supreme Court keeping in view the monetary limits and conditions prescribed therein. To facilitate the ‘jurisdiction’ for filing the appeal(s) before the Tribunals/Courts, the cut-off monetary limits are prescribed. According to the Circular, the revenue may approach this Court where the `tax effect’ is more than monetary limits i.e. `50,00,000/-. 8.
On a plain reading of clause 5 of the aforesaid Circular on which revenue has placed reliance, we do not find that any portion supports her contention. According to clause 5, the Assessing Officer is required to calculate the tax effect separately for every assessment year relating to disputed issues in the case of every assessee. The tax effect involved in each year is to be seen while deciding about filing of an appeal. However, where a composite order has been passed involving KAMAL DEEP SEHRA 2018.09.06 17:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court. Chandigarh
ITA No.472 of 2017
-7-
more than one assessment year and common issues, appeals shall be filed in respect of all such assessment years even where tax effect is less than the prescribed limit in any of the assessment year(s) where decision has been taken to file an appeal relating to a year or years where the tax effect is more than the monetary limit prescribed. The case of each assessee is to be dealt with separately in case of any composite order concerning more than one assessee. 9.
It may be noticed that circular No.3/18 dated 11.7.2018 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, New Delhi prescribes that a monetary limit for filing an appeal before the High Court is `50 lakhs, whereas cumulative tax effect involved in all these appeals is `14,18,277/- which is much below the said limit. 10. In view of the above and also keeping in view the order of the Apex Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Dhanalekshmi Bank Ltd., [2015] 373 ITR 526 (SC) where the Supreme Court had dismissed the appeal without going into the merits of the appeal due to low tax effect leaving the question of law open, the present appeals are dismissed. It is, however, clarified that dismissal of the appeals shall not be taken to be affirmation of order of the Tribunal on merits. Further, the legal
KAMAL DEEP SEHRA 2018.09.06 17:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court. Chandigarh
ITA No.472 of 2017
-8-
issue as claimed by the revenue is being left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case.
(AJAY KUMAR MITTAL)
JUDGE
August 14, 2018
(AVNEESH JHINGAN)
KD/gbs
JUDGE
Whether speaking / reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable
Yes / No KAMAL DEEP SEHRA 2018.09.06 17:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court. Chandigarh
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Ayush Sureshchandra Shah vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 27 Oct 2026
- Sureshchandra Moolchand Shah vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 27 Oct 2026
- 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