The Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax (Osd) 1 vs. M/S Mahalaxmi Investment And Trading Pvt. Ltd.

ITA/123/2021HC 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 noted that the tax effect involved was Rs. 14,16,000, which is below the monetary limits specified in CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 and CBDT Circular No. 5/2024. The Court further observed that CBDT Circular No. 9/2024, issued on 17/09/2024, supersedes the earlier circulars dated 11/07/2018 and 08/08/2019. Crucially, the latest circular does not provide an exception clause like 10(C) that would permit filing an appeal despite the tax effect being below the monetary limits. Therefore, based on the prevailing circulars, 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) filed an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore. The appeal was preferred by the Revenue. The sole controversy revolved around the entertainability of the appeal before the High Court under Clause 10(C) of CBDT Circular No. 3/2018. The tax effect involved was Rs. 14,16,000, which was below the monetary limits specified in subsequent CBDT Circulars. The respondent, M/s Mahalaxmi Investment and Trading Pvt. Ltd., was not represented.

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, notwithstanding that the tax effect involved (Rs. 14,16,000) is below the monetary limits specified in subsequent CBDT Circulars (Circular No. 17/2019 and Circular No. 5/2024). Assessee's Contentions: Not recorded as none appeared. Revenue's Contentions: The Revenue argued that the appeal should be entertained under Clause 10(C) of CBDT Circular No. 3/2018, which provides an exception for filing appeals even if the tax effect is below the prescribed limits. The Revenue relied on CBDT Circular No. 3/2018.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A

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. 123 of 2021 THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD) 1 Versus M/S MAHALAXMI INVESTMENT AND TRADING 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.955/IND/2016 dated 25/05/2021. 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.14,16,000/-, 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-123-2021 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:3553 Signed by: HEMANT SARAF Signing time: 20-02-2025 12:47:52 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-123-2021 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:3553 Signed by: HEMANT SARAF Signing time: 20-02-2025 12:47:52 Signature Not Verified

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →