Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central) vs. M/S Kalyan Toll Infrastrucuture Ltd.

PDF · subscribers
ITA/117/2018HC Madhya Pradesh04 November 2025Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that in view of the letter dated 3.11.2025, wherein the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax informed that the tax effect for the assessment year 2006-07 is below Rs.2 Crores, and in light of CBDT Circular No.5/2024 dated 15.03.2024, the appeal should be withdrawn. The court accepted the revenue's submission that the appeal was filed in 2018 and at that time, it did not fall under any exceptions of Instruction No. 21 of 2015 dated 10.12.2015. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn. No decision was made on the merits of the original ITAT order.

What were the facts?

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) filed an appeal before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Indore against a consolidated order dated 30.11.2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Bench Indore, for the assessment year 2006-07. The appeal was filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The revenue, through a letter dated 3.11.2025 from the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, informed the court that the tax effect in this case for the assessment year 2006-07 was Rs.1.50 Crores, which is below the prescribed monetary limit of Rs.2 Crores for filing appeals before the High Court as per CBDT Circular No.5/2024 dated 15.03.2024. The revenue requested withdrawal of the appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal, filed by the revenue, should be withdrawn based on the tax effect being below the prescribed monetary limit for appeals to the High Court as per the latest CBDT Circular. Assessee's Contention: The assessee is not recorded as having made any specific contentions in the provided text. The request for withdrawal comes from the revenue. Revenue's Contention: The revenue contends that the tax effect in the appeal for the assessment year 2006-07 is Rs.1.50 Crores, which is less than the Rs.2 Crores monetary limit stipulated by CBDT Circular No.5/2024 dated 15.03.2024 for filing appeals before the High Court. They also note that at the time of filing the appeal in 2018, it did not fall under any exceptions of Instruction No. 21 of 2015 dated 10.12.2015, and therefore, they pray for withdrawal of the appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A,Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA & HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI ON THE 4th OF NOVEMBER, 2025 INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 117 of 2018 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) Versus M/S KALYAN TOLL INFRASTRUCUTURE LTD. Appearance: Shri Harsh Parashar (through V.C.) along with Ms. Yashika Bondwal - Advocate for the appellant. ORDER Per: Justice Vivek Rusia 1. Appellant has preferred this appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 being aggrieved by the consolidated order dated 30.11.2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bench Indore in IT(SS)A.No.191/Ind/2016 & IT(SS)A.No.204/Ind/2016 for the assessment year 2006-07. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant has produced the copy of letter dated 3.11.2025, whereby the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-2, Indore has informed that the tax effect is below Rs.2 Crores for the assessment year 2006-07, therefore, in view of the Circular dated 17.9.2024 he prays for withdrawal of this appeal. The letter dated 3.11.2025 is reproduced below:- 1 ITA-117-2018 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:32018 Signed by: TRILOK SINGH SAVNER Signing time: 04-Nov-25 6:21:24 PM Signature Not Verified

(VIVEK RUSIA) JUDGE (BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI) JUDGE

"To, Shri Harsh Parasar, Sr. Standing Counsel, 603, A Block, 'The One', 5, RNT Marg, Indore (452001)

Sir, Sub: Instructions in ITA 117-2018, ITA 118/2018, ITA 119/2018, ITA 120/2018 and ITA 126/2018 - reg. Kindly refer to your email dated 03.11.2025 on the above mentioned subject. In this regard, it is submitted that during the course of the assessment proceedings, it was observed that the assessee company had received share application money from various bogus paper companies located at Indore, Mumbai and Kolkata during the Financial Year 2005-06 relevant to A.Y. 2006-07. It was further noticed that the share capital raised by the assessee company represented its unexplained income and, therefore, was treated as unexplained cash credit under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. While the appeal was filed before the Hon'ble High Court, the tax effect in the case of M/s Kalyan Toll Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. for A.Y. 2006-07 is Rs.1.50 Crore which is less than the prescribed monetary limit of Rs.2 Crore for filing of appeals before Hon'ble High Court, as per the latest CBDT Circular No.5/2024 dated 15.03.2024. In the letter dated 06.08.2025 issued by the undersigned, it was stated that the case falls in exception clause (h) of Para 3.1 of Circular No.05/2024 dated 17.09.2024. However, the appeal was filed in the year 2018 and at that time filing of appeal was governed by the Instruction No. 21 of 2015 dated 10.12.2015. It is further clarified that at the time of filing of appeal before Hon'ble High Court, the case didn't fall in any of the exceptions of the instruction No.21/2015 dated 10.12.2015. Accordingly, the appeal bearing ITA No.117/2018 in the case of M/s Kalyan Toll Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. may kindly be withdrawn."

3.

In view of the above, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. trilok

2 ITA-117-2018 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:32018 Signed by: TRILOK SINGH SAVNER Signing time: 04-Nov-25 6:21:24 PM 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 →