PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI-10 vs. SAM OVERSEAS

PDF · subscribers
ITA/121/2026HC DelhiDLHC01132047202411 February 2026Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court decided the issue based on the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner (appellant). The court held that the tax effect in the instant appeal falls below the limits prescribed in CBDT Circular No.5/2024 dated 15.03.2024 read with Circular No. 9/2024 dated 17.09.2024. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed. The reasoning is that appeals with a tax effect below the prescribed monetary limits are not to be pursued as per the CBDT circulars. The ratio decidendi is that appeals that do not meet the minimum tax effect threshold stipulated by CBDT circulars are liable for dismissal. The operative direction was the dismissal of the appeal. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The appellant, Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Delhi-10, filed an appeal (ITA 121/2026) before the Delhi High Court against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The appeal was filed with a delay of 709 days in refiling, for which an application (CM APPL.9575/2026) was made to condone the delay. The respondent in the appeal is Sam Overseas. The appeal concerns assessment year(s) not specified in the judgment. The amount in dispute is not stated.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the tax effect in the instant appeal falls below the limits prescribed in CBDT Circular No.5/2024 dated 15.03.2024 read with Circular No. 9/2024 dated 17.09.2024? (Question of law) Assessee's contentions: Not recorded as appearance was not given. Revenue's contentions: The learned counsel for the petitioner (appellant) submitted that the tax effect in the instant appeal falls below the limits prescribed in CBDT Circular No.5/2024 dated 15.03.2024 read with Circular No. 9/2024 dated 17.09.2024. The revenue relied on these CBDT circulars.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~101 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 121/2026, CM APPL.9574/2026 & CM APPL.9576/2026 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI-10 .....Appellant Through: Mr. Abhishek Maratha, SSC, Mr. Apoorv Agarwal, Mr. Viplav Acharya, JSCs, Ms. Nupur Sharma, Mr. Gaurav Singh, Mr. Bhanukaran Singh Jodha, Ms. Muskaan Goel, Mr. Himanshu Gaur, Mr. Gaurav Kumar Arya, Mr. Pushpag Shah and Mr. Sidharth Kumar, Advs. versus SAM OVERSEAS .....Respondent Through: Appearance not given CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR O R D E R %

11.02.2026 CM APPL. 9575/2026 (Delay in refiling) 1. For the reasons stated in the application, the delay of 709 days in refiling the appeal is condoned. 2. The application stands disposed of. ITA 121/2026 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the tax effect in the This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 13/02/2026 at 10:48:34

instant appeal falls below the limits prescribed in CBDT Circular No.5/2024 dated 15.03.2024 read with Circular No. 9/2024 dated 17.09.2024. 4. In view of the aforesaid, the appeal is dismissed. 5. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. DINESH MEHTA, J VINOD KUMAR, J FEBRUARY 11, 2026/cd This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 13/02/2026 at 10:48:34

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →