ACIT- CC-4(4) CR. 4, PR. CIT- (C)- 2, MUMBAI vs. UMAX PACKAGING LTD,., MUMBAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that the tax effect was below the monetary limit for filing departmental appeals as per CBDT Circular No. 17 of 2019. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn/not pressed.
What were the facts?
The Revenue filed an appeal against an order of the CIT(A) that allowed the assessee's appeal. The tax effect in the Revenue's appeal was INR 39,84,629/-.
What were the issues?
Whether the departmental appeal filed before the Tribunal is maintainable given the tax effect and CBDT circulars on monetary limits.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, F BENCH, MUMBAI
order : 02.09.2022 O R D E R Per Rahul Chaudhary, Judicial Member: 1. By way of the present appeal the Revenue has challenged the order, dated 23.02.2021, passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-52 Mumbai, [hereinafter referred to as ‘the CIT(A)’] for the Assessment Year 2013-14, whereby the Ld. CIT(A) had allowed the appeal filed by the Assessee against the Assessment Order, dated 30.12.2016 passed under section 143(3) read with Section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Assessment Year: 2013-14 2. When appeal was taken up for hearing, none was present for the Assessee. However, we note that as per Form No. 36, the tax effect in the present appeal is INR 39,84,629/-. According to the Circular No. 17 of 2019, dated 08.08.2019, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) the monetary limit for filing departmental appeal before the Tribunal stands enhanced and departmental appeal is not be filed before the Tribunal in cases where the tax effect does not exceed the specified monetary limits of INR 50 Lakhs. The tax effect in the present appeal below the aforesaid specified monetary limit and therefore, the present appeal is dismissed as ‘withdrawn/not pressed’ in terms of the above-said circular.
However, in case on re-verification the Revenue comes to the conclusion that the tax effect is higher than the above-said specified monetary limit, or the appeal falls within the exemption clause as contained in Circular No.3/2018, dated 11-7-2018 as amended by the letter [F.No.279/Misc.142/2007-ITJ (PT)], dated 20-8-2018 then the Revenue would be at liberty to file Miscellaneous Application seeking recall the present order. The application should be filed within time limit prescribed in the Act.
In the result, this appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.
More judgments on Section 153A
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Ashok Singh, Jaipur vs ACIT, Circle-2 Jaipur, JaipurITA 1540/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central… vs Ig3 Infra Limited, KanchipuramITA 2578/CHNY/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central… vs Ig3 Infra Limited, OggiamthoraipakkaITA 2577/CHNY/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central… vs Shanmugham Thiagarajan, ChennaiITA 2576/CHNY/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Redamancy World Through Its Proprietor Sanjay Kumar Goel vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Arj Exim INDIA vs. Additional Commissioner Of CGST, Appeals-Ii, New Delhi And OrsDelhi · 27 Oct 2026
- The State Of Bihar Through The Commissioner Of State Tax vs. Kaushlendra KumarPatna · 27 Oct 2026
- Ayush Sureshchandra Shah vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 27 Oct 2026
- Sureshchandra Moolchand Shah vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 27 Oct 2026