Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax I vs. Amandeep Singh Bhatia
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court allowed the prayer for withdrawal of the appeals. The Court noted that the appeals were filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against orders of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Central Board of Direct Taxes had issued circulars regarding monetary limits for filing appeals, but also specified exceptions where appeals should be contested on merits. The Revenue's counsel, referencing these circulars, sought to withdraw the appeals. The Court granted this request, dismissing the appeals as withdrawn. However, the Court explicitly stated that the question of law was left open, meaning the merits of the underlying legal issues were not decided.
What were the facts?
The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Indore, filed several appeals under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Bench at Indore. These appeals were against orders passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The appeals were filed concerning various assessment years and assessees, including Shri Gurvindar Singh Bhatia, Surendra Singh Bhatia, and Amandeep Singh Bhatia. The Central Board of Direct Taxes had issued circulars specifying monetary limits for filing appeals. However, certain categories of adverse judgments were to be contested on merits irrespective of the tax effect. The appellant's counsel, citing these circulars, prayed for the withdrawal of the present appeals.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the present appeals are maintainable in light of the monetary limits prescribed by the Central Board of Direct Taxes' circulars for filing appeals before the High Court? (Question of law) Assessee's Contention: The judgment records no specific contention from the assessees regarding the maintainability of the appeals. The appeals were withdrawn by the Revenue. Revenue's Contention: The learned counsel for the appellant (Revenue) submitted that the present appeals are covered under the circulars issued by the Department and prayed for withdrawal of the appeals.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
--- 1 --- HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : BENCH AT INDORE D.B.: HON'BLE MR. S. C. SHARMA AND HON'BLE MR. SHAILENDRA SHUKLA, JJ INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 15 / 2017 THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. SHRI GURVINDAR SINGH BHATIA INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 21 / 2017 THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. SURENDRA SINGH BHATIA INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 22 / 2017 THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. GURVINDAR SINGH BHATIA INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 23 / 2017 THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. AMANDEEP SINGH BHATIA INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 24 / 2017 THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. AMANDEEP SINGH BHATIA INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 27 / 2017 THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. GURVINDAR SINGH BHATIA INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 29 / 2017 THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. AMANDEEP SINGH BHATIA INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 31 / 2017 THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. AMANDEEP SINGH BHATIA --- 2 --- * * * * * O R D E R (31/10/2019) PER : S. C. SHARMA, J :- The present appeal has been filed u/S. 260A of the Income Tax Act 1961 by the Commissioner of Income Tax Indore against the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Central Board of Direct Taxes has issued a circular No. 3/2018 fixing the monetary limit for filing of appeals before the High Courts and before the Supreme Court. However, certain appeals are to be decided on merits. Paragraph 10 of the Circular dated 11/07/2018 reads as under: Para 10 of the Circular dated 11/7/2018 reads as under : 10. Adverse judgments relating to the following issues should be contested on merits notwithstanding that the tax effect entailed is less than the monetary limits specified in para 3 above or there is no tax effect : (a) Where the Constitutional validity of the provisions of an Act or Rule is under challenge, or (b) Where Board's order, Notification, Instruction or Circular has been held to be illegal or ultra vires, or (c) Where Revenue Audit objection in the case has been accepted by the Department, or (d) Where the addition relates to undisclosed foreign assets / bank accounts. That the circular no. 3/2018 was further revised by the circular dated 20/08/2018 and paragraph 10 was amended as under : 3. Para 10 of the said Circular provides that adverse judgments relating to the issues enumerated in the said para should be contested on merits notwithstanding that the tax effect entailed is less than the monetary limits specified in para 3 thereof or there is no tax effect. Para 10 of the Circular No.3 of 2018 dated 11/7/2018 is hereby amended as under: 10. Adverse judgments relating to the following issues should be contested on merits notwithstanding that the tax effect entailed is less than the monetary limits specified in para 3 above or there is no tax effect : (a) Where the Constitutional validity of the provisions of an Act or Rule is under challenge, or (b) Where Board's order, Notification, Instruction or Circular has been held to be illegal or ultra vires, or (c) Where Revenue Audit objection in the case has been accepted --- 3 --- by the Department, or (d) Where the addition relates to undisclosed foreign income / undisclosed foreign assets (including financial assets) / undisclosed foreign bank account. (e) Where addition is based on information received from external sources in the nature of law enforcement agencies such as CBI / ED / DRI / SFIO / Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI). (f) Cases where prosecution has been filed by the Department and is pending in the Court. Thereafter another circular was issued on 08/08/2019 and the monetary limit was enhanced to Rs. 1.00 crore in respect of High Court. A further clarificatory circular was issued on 6th September, 2019 and the Department has been permitted, irrespective of valuation, to file an appeal on merits in cases involved in organized tax evasion activity (Circular dated 6th September, 2019). The present appeal is covered under the circular issued by the Department and the learned counsel for the appellant prays for withdrawal of the present appeal. The prayer is allowed. The appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. However, the question of law is left open. (S. C. SHARMA) J U D G E (SHAILENDRA SHUKLA) J U D G E KR Digitally signed by Kamal Rathor Date: 2019.11.04 16:21:27 +05'30'
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Surya Prakash Aroma vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh And 2 OthersAllahabad · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Govindjee Dairy Milk Private Limited vs. Central Goods And Services TaxRajasthan · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S. V J Petro Products vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St) - IiiAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Asian Aura vs. Government Of Nct Of Delhi And Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Shining Steel Through Its Proprietor Kartik Gupta vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026