INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUMBAI vs. PREM PRAKASH, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4922/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 June 2025AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the tax effect involved in the appeal was below the prescribed limit for filing appeals, as per a CBDT notification. Consequently, the Revenue's appeal was liable to be dismissed as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The Revenue Department preferred an appeal against an order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC)/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The appeal pertained to Assessment Year 2017-18.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable given the tax effect below the prescribed limit as per CBDT notification.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY

For Respondent: Shri Kavan Limbasiya, Ld. D.R
Hearing: 12.06.2025Pronounced: 08.07.2025

O R D E R

Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicial Member:

1.

This appeal has been preferred by the Revenue Department against the order dated 26/07/2024, impugned herein, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC)/ Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (in short Ld. Commissioner) u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the A.Y. 2017-18.

2.

The tax effect involved in this appeal is below than the prescribed limit as prescribed by CBDT vide notification dated 17th September 2024 wherein the revenue authority is precluded from filing the appeal against the order, wherein the tax effect is below than Rs. 60 lakh. Thus, the appeal of the revenue department is liable to be dismissed as withdrawn.

Order pronounced in the open court on 08.07.2025.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →