The Pr. Commissioner of Income-tax -4 vs. M/s. Padmasri Townships Private Limited
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court held that the appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed in terms of CBDT Circular No. 9 of 2024 dated September 17, 2024. The reasoning was that the tax effect of the appeal was well below the monetary limit of Rs. 2.00 crore stipulated for filing appeals before the High Court. The Court stated that if the appeal fell within any exception provided in Circular No. 5 of 2024, the Income Tax Department would be at liberty to seek revival of the appeal. No order as to costs was made. Consequently, any pending miscellaneous petitions were also closed.
What were the facts?
The Revenue, represented by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-4, Hyderabad, filed an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against an order dated August 25, 2021, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Hyderabad Bench-B. The appeal pertained to Assessment Year 2014-2015 and was filed against M/s. Padmasri Townships Private Limited. The High Court noted that the tax effect in the instant appeal was well below the monetary limit prescribed by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) for filing appeals.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable before the High Court, given the monetary limits prescribed by CBDT Circulars for filing appeals. The Revenue, through its Senior Standing Counsel, did not present arguments on the merits of the case. The High Court's decision was based on the applicability of CBDT Circular No. 9 of 2024, which amended Circular No. 5 of 2024, enhancing monetary limits for appeals to reduce litigation. The circular fixed the monetary limit for filing an appeal before the High Court at Rs. 2.00 crore. The Revenue's appeal was found to have a tax effect below this limit.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
The Gourt delivered the following: JUDGMENT
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NARSINI] RAO NANDIKONDA ITTA No.70 OF 2022 06.05.2026 Betrveen: Principal Cornmissioner of Income Tax-4, Hvderabad. Appellant AND Mrs Padmasri Townships Private Lirnited. 3-6-114, Opp. Telangana Exchange, L.B.Nagar. Hyderabad 500 074. (PAN: AADCP9596L) .Respondent JUDGMENT (per Hon'ble Sri Juslice P.Som Koshy) Heard Mr. Kamasani Sudhakar Reddy, leamed Senior Standing Counsel lbr the Income Tax Department 1br the appellant Perused the record
This appeal under Section 2604, of the Incomc l-ax Act, 1961, has been preferred b1' the Revenue as the appellant agirinst the order dated 25.08.2021 passed by the Income Tax AppeJlate Tribunal. Hyderabad Bench 'B, Hyderabad, in I.T.A.No.l658/H1 d/19 for the Assessment Y ear 2014-2015
2
Central Board o1'Direct laxes (CBDI ) has issued Circular No.9 of 2024 dated l'7.09.2024. amending the previous Circular No.5 of 2024 dated 15.03.2024, by further enhancing the rnonetary limits lor filing appeals by the Income Tax Department before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunals, High Courts and Supreme Court as a measure for reducing litigation. In paragraph 2 of the said Circular, we find that the monetary limit fixed lor filing an appeal before the High Court is Rs.2.00 crore 4 In the instant appeal, tax eflect is well below the monetary limit.
Therefbre, the appeal filed by the Departrnent is dismissed in terms of the aloresaid Circular No.9 of 2024 dated l'/.09.2024 However, if the appeal comes within the exception of Circular No.5 ol 2024, ft would be open to the Income Tax Department to seek revival of the appeal. There shall be no order as to costs
Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, iI any, shall stand c losed MOHD. TSMAIL DEPU TY REGIS //// SECTION OFFICER To, 1 2 .) 4 The lncome Tax Appellate.Tribunal Hyderabad Bench-B' Hyderabad' nne CC to Sri Kamasanr Sudnakar Reddy (Senior Standing Counsel For il.o." r,'l toPUCl ;;;;;; ;;' MN Advocates' Advocate IoPUC] Two CD CoPies
\ HIGH COURT DATED: 06/05/2026 JUDGMENT ITTA.No.70 of 2022 DISMISSING THE APPEAL WITHOUT COSTS 11 l.. oG 1Ul: S14 t l)\, 1 z iiiN 2026 ,t i1C*9 \ -^lr/ r;/' 6 (v\,0 .,
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Tankala Soumya vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Rayagada Circle, RayagadaOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Pooja, Town Hallroad, Cuttack vs. State Tax Officer, Cuttack-I West Circle,CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Chicvogue Fashions Lip, Ganjam vs. State Tax Officer Bhubaneswar- Ii CircleOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Priya, Townhall Road, Cuttack vs. Superintendent Cuttack- I Range, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- Dwaraka Jewellers, Bhubaneswar vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
