The Principal Director of Income Tax (Investigation) vs. Mr. Prasad Nimmagadda

PDF · subscribers
ITTA/140/2025HC TelanganaHBHC01043061202509 September 2025Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO4 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the appeal was not sustainable. The Court referred to Circular No. 5 of 2024, which raised the monetary limit for preferring appeals before the High Courts and Supreme Court from Rs. 1 crore to Rs. 2 crores. Since the tax effect in the present case was only Rs. 10,00,000/-, which is significantly below the prescribed monetary limit, the appeal was dismissed. The Court found that the appeal was not maintainable in terms of the said circular. Consequently, any pending miscellaneous petitions were also closed.

What were the facts?

This case involves an appeal filed by the Principal Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Hyderabad, against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench 'B'. The appeal pertains to the Assessment Year 2019-20. The dispute revolves around a penalty imposed by the appellant under Section 43 of the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015. The tax effect in this case is stated to be Rs. 10,00,000/-. The appeal was filed before the High Court under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable before the High Court given the monetary limit prescribed by the Department's circulars. The Revenue contended that the appeal was filed in accordance with the law. The Respondent (assessee) did not present any arguments as recorded in the judgment. The Tribunal's order, which is under challenge, was passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench 'B'. The primary issue that arose for consideration by the High Court was the maintainability of the appeal based on the monetary limit for appeals stipulated by the Income Tax Department.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A,Section 43

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

,'\ [ 348e 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR 1-I{E STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERAtsAD TUESDAY, THE NINI H DA./ OI: SEPTEMBER T\AiO THOUSI\I.JD ANt] TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABI..F- sRI .II.JSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURAI3LE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO INCOME TAx TRIBUNAL APFEAL. NO: 140 OF 2025 lncome Tax Tribunal Appeal L.Jnder Sler.tion 2604 of the lncome Tax Act,1961 against the Order dated "'6.01 .202!t rxrss;r-,,; ii' Et'/tA.2lHydl2024 for the Assessment Year 2019-20 on the file of the lncor-re 121 r.poellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Benchs 'B', Hyderabad. Between: The Principal Director ')f lnccrner [;r (lnvestigation), Aayakar . Bhawan, Hyderabad. ...Appellant AND Mr. Prasad Nimmagadda, l)lot No 2421P-, ft.oad No 76, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad - 5OO 033 PAN - ABKPN3OTSN ...Respondent Counsel for the Appellant : Mr. N. Praveen Reddy Standing counsel for lncome Tax Departmenl Counsel for the Respondent : The Court made the following: ORDER \

--= \ THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SANI KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI- JUS'IIC [, SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO I.T.T.A.No.140 OF 2025 ORDER, (per Hon'ble Sri Justice P.Sam Koshy) Heard Mr. N.Praveen Reddy, Senior Standirrr (lounsel 1br the Income Tax Department appearing for the appelL:rrt 2. In the course of the hearing, it has been foLrrr, I thar thc tax effect arising in the instant case is only Rs.10,00,000 - ( l'en Lakhs Only) that too by way of penalty imposed by thc ar,rellant under Section 43 of Black Money (Undisclosed Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015. Hovr'cr t'r. perusal of Circular No.5 of 2024, where the monetary limit firccl by the department in the course of preferring an apDeal beli:r,: thc I-|TA's, High Courts md Supreme Court has been raised frolr lts. I crorc to Rs.2 crores. We find that the tax effect in instarrt casc is only Rs.10,00,000/- which is much below the monetat)'lilrit prcscribed under the sairl Circular. I Foreign lncome and

2 ( 3. In view olthe same, we are olthe considered opinion that in terms of the Circular No.5 of 2024, the instant appeal may not be sustainable and the same accordingly stands dismissed. Consequently, miscellancous petirions pending, if any, shaU stand closed. I \ //TRLTE: C(]!rY// SD/- N. SRIHARI EPUTY REGISTRAR CTION OFFICER To, DL/ h 1. The lncome Tax Acpellate Tribunal -lyr.erabad Benchs ,8,, Hyderabad. 2. One CC to Mr. N. Praveen Redcly Sir lnding counsel for lncome Tax Department tOpUCl 3. Two CD Copies G

I I / HIGH COURT DATED:09/09/2025 ORDER lTTA.No.140 ot 2025 DISMISSING THE APPEAL .,/ /r'l'.' /, if r. lliE s14t- li t: \rt- \Y. 10 0[T 2i16 n, ,i ) { ,--:==a::-:=

More judgments on Section 43

All 78 judgments and leading authorities on Section 43 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →