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

PDF · subscribers
ITA/107/2021HC 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 is not maintainable. The Court observed that CBDT Circular No. 5/2024, dated 15/03/2024, which was later amended by Circular No. 9/2024 dated 17/09/2024, superseded the earlier Circulars dated 11/07/2018 and 08/08/2019. Crucially, the Court noted that the later circulars do not provide for an exception clause, such as 10(C), which would allow an appeal to be filed notwithstanding that the tax effect is less than the stipulated monetary limits. Therefore, based on the superseding circulars and the absence of an applicable exception, the appeal was dismissed as not maintainable. The appellant was granted liberty to file an application if the cause of action survives 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. 517/IND/2019 dated 13/01/2021. The respondent is M/s Charita Gold Pvt. Ltd. The core issue revolves around the entertainability of the Revenue's appeal before the High Court, specifically concerning the monetary limits stipulated in CBDT Circulars. The tax effect in this case is Rs. 8,81,000, which is below the limits specified in Circular No. 17/2019 and Circular No. 5/2024. The appeal was filed by the Revenue, and no appearance was made by the respondent. The High Court noted that later circulars superseded earlier ones.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable 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. 8,81,000) is below the monetary limits specified in subsequent CBDT Circulars No. 17/2019 dated 08/08/2019 and No. 5/2024 dated 15/03/2024. Assessee (Revenue) Contentions: The appellant contended that the appeal was entertainable under exception Clause 10(C) of CBDT Circular No. 3/2018. They relied on the existence of this exception clause for filing appeals even when the tax effect is below the monetary limit. Revenue Contentions: No arguments were recorded for the respondent (assessee).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260(A)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Before: HONBLE SHRI JUSTICE SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI & HONBLE SHRI JUSTICE GAJENDRA SINGH

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. 107 of 2021 THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD) 1 Versus M/S CHARITA GOLD 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.517/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.8,81,000/-, 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. 1 ITA-107-2021 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:3550 Signed by: HEMANT SARAF Signing time: 20-02-2025 14:10:59 Signature Not Verified

(SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI) JUDGE (GAJENDRA SINGH) JUDGE On perusal of the Circular dated 15/03/2024, which was later on, 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-107-2021 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:3550 Signed by: HEMANT SARAF Signing time: 20-02-2025 14:10:59 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 →