The Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax (Osd) 1 vs. M/S Dhirendra International Pvt. Ltd.

PDF · subscribers
ITA/104/2021HC Madhya Pradesh11 February 2025Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI2 pages
For Petitioner: Veena Mandlik
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the appeal filed by the Revenue was not maintainable. The Court observed that the tax effect involved in the case was Rs.27,12,000/-, which was below the monetary limits prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 and CBDT Circular No. 5/2024. Crucially, the Court noted that CBDT Circular No. 5/2024, as amended by Circular No. 9/2024, superseded the earlier circulars dated 11/07/2018 and 08/08/2019. The latest circular did not provide an exception clause (like 10(C)) that would allow filing an appeal despite the tax effect being below the specified monetary limits. Therefore, based on the prevailing circulars at the time of consideration, the appeal was dismissed as not maintainable. The appellant was granted liberty to file an application if the cause of action survived as per law.

What were the facts?

The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD), the appellant, filed an appeal under Section 260(A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore, in ITA No.750/Ind/2019 dated 13/01/2021. The respondent is M/s Dhirendra International Pvt. Ltd. The appeal was filed by the Revenue. The core issue revolved around the maintainability of the appeal before the High Court under exception Clause 10(C) of CBDT Circular No.3/2018 dated 11/07/2018. The tax effect involved in the case was Rs.27,12,000/-, which was below the monetary limits specified in subsequent CBDT Circulars No. 17/2019 and 5/2024.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is entertainable before this Court under exception Clause 10(C) of CBDT Circular No.3/2018 dated 11/07/2018, notwithstanding that the tax effect involved (Rs.27,12,000/-) is below the monetary limits specified in subsequent CBDT Circulars. Assessee's Contention: Not recorded. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue contended that the appeal was maintainable under exception Clause 10(C) of CBDT Circular No.3/2018. However, the judgment notes that subsequent circulars, including Circular No. 5/2024 (amended by Circular No. 9/2024), supersede the earlier ones and do not provide for such an exception clause for filing appeals below the monetary limits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260(A)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI & HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GAJENDRA SINGH ON THE 11th OF FEBRUARY, 2025 INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 104 of 2021 THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD) 1 Versus M/S DHIRENDRA INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD. Appearance: Shri Harsh Parashar - senior standing counsel with Shri Shantanu Sharma - counsel for the appellant. None for the respondent. ORDER Per: Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari The instant appeal under Section 260(A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 has been preferred by the appellant being aggrieved by the order passed by learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore, in ITA No.750/Ind/2019 dated 13/01/2021. The only controversy seems to be involved in the case as to whether the appeal filed by the Revenue would be entertainable before this Court under exception Clause 10(C) of CBDT Circular No.3/2018 dated 11/07/2018. Admittedly, the tax effect involved in the case is Rs.27,12,000/-, which is below the monetary limit as specified in the Circular No. 17/2019 dated 08/08/2019 and CBDT Circular No. 5/2024 dated 15/03/2024. On perusal of the Circular dated 15/03/2024, which was later on, 1 ITA-104-2021 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:3549 Signed by: HEMANT SARAF Signing time: 20-02-2025 12:47:52 Signature Not Verified

(SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI) JUDGE (GAJENDRA SINGH) JUDGE amended by Circular No. 9/2024 dated 17/09/2024 issued by CBDT supersedes the Circular dated 11/07/2018 and 08/08/2019, it is seen that it does not provide exception clause i.e. 10(C), wherein the appeal can be filed notwithstanding that the tax effect entailed is less than the monetary limits under the exceptions given. In view of above, the appeal is not maintainable. Accordingly, same is hereby dismissed. However, the appellant would be at liberty to file application, in case cause of action survives as per law. HS

2 ITA-104-2021 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:3549 Signed by: HEMANT SARAF Signing time: 20-02-2025 12:47:52 Signature Not Verified

More judgments on Section 260(A)

All 2,570 judgments and leading authorities on Section 260(A) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →