PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 vs. SHANTI LAL DEORA

PDF · subscribers
ITA/5/2022HC Rajasthan2025:RJ-JD:18573-DB15 April 2025Bench: SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR, SUNIL BENIWAL2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the withdrawal of the appeal. The Revenue, represented by its counsel, sought permission to withdraw the present appeal, citing CBDT Circular No.9 of 2024, which discourages appeals with a total tax effect below two crores. This decision was also influenced by a prior order in a similar case, D.B. Income Tax Appeal No.08 of 2021. The Court, acknowledging the Revenue's submission and the issuance of the new circular, disposed of the appeal as withdrawn. The specific tax effect of Rs.45,37,964/- was noted, which falls below the threshold mentioned in the later circular. No other issues were decided on merits.

What were the facts?

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax - 1, Jodhpur (the Revenue) filed an Income Tax Appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against an order dated 08th September 2021 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench. The Assessing Officer had determined the assessee, Shanti Lal Deora, to be liable for Rs.45,37,964/-. The Revenue initially filed the appeal based on CBDT Circular No.17 of 2019. Subsequently, CBDT Circular No.9 of 2024 was issued, which stipulated that matters with a total tax effect of less than two crores are not to be taken to court. In light of this new circular and a previous order in a similar case, the Revenue sought permission to withdraw the appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable in light of subsequent CBDT Circular No.9 of 2024, which sets a monetary threshold for filing appeals? The Revenue argued that following CBDT Circular No.9 of 2024, which directs that matters with a total tax effect of less than two crores should not be taken to court, and referring to the order in D.B. Income Tax Appeal No.08 of 2021 (Commissioner of Income Tax-I vs. Satish Kumar Agarwal), it sought permission to withdraw the present appeal. The judgment does not record any arguments from the respondent (assessee).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

[2025:RJ-JD:18573-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 5/2022 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax - 1, Jodhpur. ----Appellant Versus Shanti Lal Deora, Hotel Inder Palace Bhagat Singh Circle Sumerpur District Pali. ----Respondent For Appellant(s) : Mr. K.K. Bissa, Adv. For Respondent(s) : -- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL BENIWAL Order 15/04/2025 This Income Tax Appeal has been filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to challenge the order dated 08th September 2021 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench. 2. According to the Income Tax Department, the Assessee was liable to pay Rs.45,37,964/- as reported by the Assessing Officer. However, the Income Tax Department decided to file the present appeal

under

Section

260-A

view

the Circular No.17 of 2019 dated 8th August, 2019 of the C.B.D.T. 3. Later on, Circular No.9 of 2024 came to be issued under which the matters involving total tax effect of less than two crores are not required to be taken to the Court. 4. In that view of the matter, referring to the order passed in D.B. Income Tax Appeal No.08 of 2021 “Commissioner of Income (Uploaded on 17/04/2025 at 02:14:30 PM) (Downloaded on 27/10/2026 at 11:15:39 PM)

[2025:RJ-JD:18573-DB] (2 of 2) [ITA-5/2022] Tax-I vs. Satish Kumar Agarwal”, Mr. K.K. Bissa, the learned counsel for the appellant– Income Tax Department seeks permission to withdraw the present appeal. 5. D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 5/2022 is disposed of as such. (SUNIL BENIWAL),J (SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR),J 34- Ravi Khandelwal Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) (Uploaded on 17/04/2025 at 02:14:30 PM) (Downloaded on 27/10/2026 at 11:15:39 PM)

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 →