PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 4 NEW DELHI vs. M/S MAJESTIC PROPERTIES PVT. LTD.

PDF · subscribers
ITA/428/2025HC DelhiDLHC01102076202327 July 2026Author: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal. The Court accepted the submission made by the respondent-assessee that the appeal should be dismissed in terms of CBDT Circular No. 05/2024, dated 15.03.2024. This circular prescribes monetary limits for filing appeals. Since the consequential order giving effect to the revisional order under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, created a liability of Rs. 25 lakhs, which was below the specified limit, the appeal was not maintainable. The Revenue's counsel could not dispute this position. The pending application was also disposed of.

What were the facts?

The appeal before the Delhi High Court was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 4, New Delhi (Revenue) against an order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax in exercise of revisional jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee is M/s Majestic Properties Pvt. Ltd. The respondent-assessee argued that the appeal should be dismissed because the consequential order giving effect to the Section 263 order creates a liability of Rs. 25 lakhs, which is below the monetary limits prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 05/2024. The Revenue's counsel was unable to dispute this position.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal, arising from a revisional order under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, should be dismissed on the grounds of monetary limits prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 05/2024, given that the consequential order creates a liability of Rs. 25 lakhs? Assessee's Contention: The appeal should be dismissed as the amount in dispute (Rs. 25 lakhs) is less than the threshold stipulated in CBDT Circular No. 05/2024. The assessee relied on the judgments in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Maharishi Ayurveda Products Pvt Ltd (ITA 429/2025) and Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. Nivesh Group (ITA 420/2024). Revenue's Contention: The Revenue's counsel was not in a position to dispute the assessee's submission.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
$~279 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 428/2025 & CM APPL. 58666/2025 PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 4 NEW DELHI .....Appellant Through: Mr. Shlok Chandra, SSC with Ms. Naincy Jain, JSC, Ms. Madhavi Shukla, JSC with Mr. Udit Dad, Advs. versus M/S MAJESTIC PROPERTIES PVT. LTD. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Somil Agarwal and Mr. Dushyant Agrawal, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA

O R D E R % 27.07.2026

1.

Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that although the appeal in question arises from an order passed by the Commissioner in exercise of revisional juri iction under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’] but since the consequential order giving effect to the order passed under Section 263 of the Act creates a liability of Rs. 25 lakhs, the appeal deserves to be dismissed as amount lesser than the limits prescribed by the CBDT in the circular No. 05/2024 is involved. He relied upon judgment of this Court in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Maharishi Ayurveda Products Pvt Ltd in ITA 429/2025 and in Principal This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/07/2026 at 14:56:04

Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. Nivesh Group in ITA 420/2024. 2. Mr. Shlok Chandra, learned Senior Standing Counsel is not in a position to dispute the above position of facts and law.

3.

The appeal is, therefore, dismissed in terms of the CBDT circular No. 05/2024, dated 15.03.2024. Pending application also stands disposed of. DINESH MEHTA, J. RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA, J. JULY 27, 2026/ s This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/07/2026 at 14:56:04

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →