THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL ), HYD. vs. OIL COUNTRY TUBULAR LTD., HYD.

ITTA/51/2011HC TelanganaHBHC01039511201120 August 2025Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO4 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the appeal filed by the Revenue was not maintainable before it. This decision was based on CBDT Circular No. 9 of 2024, which sets a monetary limit of Rs. 2.00 crore for filing appeals before the High Court. The court found that the tax effect in the present appeal was significantly below this limit. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed. The court also noted that if the appeal fell within any exception provided in Circular No. 5 of 2024, the Income Tax Department could seek revival of the appeal. No order as to costs was made. The operative direction was the dismissal of the appeal.

What were the facts?

The Revenue, as the appellant, filed an Income Tax Tribunal Appeal (ITTA) under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, challenging an order dated January 11, 2008, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Hyderabad Bench 'B'. The appeal pertained to the Assessment Year 1999-2000. The assessee is Oil Country Tubular Ltd. The High Court noted that the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) had issued Circular No. 9 of 2024, amending Circular No. 5 of 2024, to enhance monetary limits for filing appeals. The circular stipulated a monetary limit of Rs. 2.00 crore for appeals before the High Court. The court observed that the tax effect in the instant appeal was well below this prescribed monetary limit.

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 Circular No. 9 of 2024? (Question of law) Assessee's Contention: The assessee did not explicitly argue any points as the appeal was dismissed on procedural grounds related to monetary limits. The judgment does not record any specific arguments from the assessee regarding the merits of the case. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue's appeal was filed against the ITAT's order. However, the judgment indicates that the appeal was dismissed not on merits, but due to the tax effect being below the monetary limit specified in the relevant CBDT Circular. The Revenue relied on the fact that they had filed the appeal, but the court applied the circular to dismiss it.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

r [ 348s ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL NO: 51 OF 2011 ' lncome Tax Tribunal Appeal Under Section 2604 of the lncome Tax Act,1961 against the Order dated 11-01-2008 passed in ITA No.13/Hyd/2006 for the Assessment Year 1999-2000 on the file of the lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench'B', Hyderabad. Between: The Commissioner of lncome Tax (Central ), Hyderabad ...Appellant AND Oil Country Tubular Ltd., '108, Kanchanjunga, King Koti Road, Hyderabad ...ReSpondent Counsel for the Appellant: Ms. B.SAPNA REDDY, (SR SC FOR INCOM TAX) Counsel for the Respondents: Ms. K.PRABHABATI, REPRESENTING SRI K VASANT KUMAR The Court made the following: JUDGMENT

-ry. \ THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND .fHE TIONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO ITTA No.5l OF 201r JUDGMENI: (per Hon'ble Sri Justice P.Som Koshy) Heard Ms. B.Sapna Reddy, leamed Senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department for the appellant and Ms. K.Prabhabati, learned counsel representing Mr. K.Vasant Kumar, learned counsel for the res[,ondent. Perused the record 2. This rlppeal r.rnder Section 260,4. of the Income Tax Act, 1961, has been preferred by the Revenue as 1he appellant against the order dated 11.01.2008 passed by the lncome Tax Appellate 'Iribunal, Hyderabad Bench 'B', Hvderabad, 1n I.T.A.No.13/Hyd/2006 for the Assessment Year 1999-2000. 3. Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) has issued Circular No.9 of 2024 dated 17.09.2024, amending the previous Circular No.5 of 2024 dated 15.03.2024, by fi.rrther enhancing the monetary limits for filing appeals by the Income Tax Deparlmcnt before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunals, High Courts and Supreme Court

Il, 2 as a measure for reducing litigation. In paragraph 2 of the said Circular, we find that the monetary limit fixed for filing an appeal belore the High Court is Rs.2.00 crorc. 4 In the instant appeal, tax effect is well below the monetarv limit. 5. Therefore, the appeal filed by the Deparlment is dismissed in terms of the aforesaid Circular No.9 of 2024 d,ated, 11 .09.2024. However, if the appeal comes within the exception of Circular No.5 of 2024, it would be open to the lncome Tax Depaftment to seek revival of the appeal. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, rniscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. /ITRUE COPY// SD/- N. SRIHARI UTY REGISTRAR CTION OFFICER To, ABK/gh VV 1. The lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench 'B" Hyderabad' . ^- 2. One CC to Ms. B.Sapna Reddy (SR Sb for lncome Tax)' Advocate IOPUC] 5. On" CC to Sri K Vasant Kumar, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CD CoPies

HIGH COURT DATED: 2OlOBl2O25 JUDGMENT |TTA.No.S1 ol 2011 DISMISSING THE ITTA WITHOUT COSTS /6 /, <' IJ { ti:- .i l'4 I:: ()( o 0 3 0[T 2[6 ').\,:'+ r.5a,...'.,,, ' ,-, 6 \6_ 6\otB., I .u@

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →