PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I vs. M/S BANSIWALA IRON AND STEEL ROLLING MILLS

ITA/15/2022HC RajasthanRJHC02019343202225 March 2025Bench: AVNEESH JHINGAN,MANEESH SHARMA1 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal held that the appeal is not maintainable in view of the circular of the Central Board of Direct Taxes dated 17.09.2024, as the tax effect in the appeal is below two crores. The learned counsel for the appellant (Revenue) could not make out a case to bring the appeal within the ambit of the exceptions mentioned in the circular. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed. The Tribunal explicitly stated that the formulated substantial question of law is kept open, implying that while the appeal was dismissed on procedural grounds (maintainability), the underlying legal issue was not adjudicated upon.

What were the facts?

This is an appeal filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Jaipur (the Revenue) against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The respondent is M/s Bansiwala Iron And Steel Rolling Mills. The tax effect in the appeal is stated to be below two crores. The appeal was filed before the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Bench at Jaipur. The procedural history involves the filing of the appeal by the Revenue and the subsequent arguments presented by both sides.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal is maintainable before the High Court, considering the tax effect and the circular of the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) dated 17.09.2024? The Revenue contended that the appeal is maintainable. However, the learned counsel for the appellant (Revenue) was unable to demonstrate that the appeal falls within the exceptions mentioned in the CBDT circular dated 17.09.2024, which likely sets monetary limits for appeals. The respondent's arguments are not explicitly recorded in the judgment, but their presence indicates they were represented and likely opposed the appeal on maintainability grounds or otherwise. 2. Whether the substantial question of law, if any, is to be decided on merits?

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

[2025:RJ-JP:13445-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 15/2022 Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-I, New Central Revenue Building, Statue Circle, Jaipur (Raj.) ----Appellant Versus M/s Bansiwala Iron And Steel Rolling Mills, 2Nd Floor, Somani Building, S.c. Link Road, Loha Mandi, Jaipur Pin/gir No. Aadfb2375A ----Respondent For Appellant(s) : Mr.Anuroop Singhi, Adv. with Mr.NS Bhati, Adv. & Mr.Aditya Khandelwal, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr.Tarak Ahuja, Adv. (through VC) for Mr.Mahendra Gargeiya, Adv. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANEESH SHARMA Order 25/03/2025 1. The tax effect in the appeal is below two crores. The appeal is not maintainable in view of the circular of the Central Board of Direct Taxes dated 17.09.2024. 2. Learned counsel for appellant has not been able to made out a case to bring the appeal within the ambit of exceptions mentioned in the circular. 3. The appeal is dismissed. 4. The formulated substantial question of law is kept open. (MANEESH SHARMA), J (AVNEESH JHINGAN), J Himanshu Soni/87

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →