DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR vs. SHRI ALKESH PATNI, JAIPUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the Revenue's appeal was not maintainable as the tax effect was below the prescribed monetary limit. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed.
What were the facts?
The Revenue filed an appeal against an order for Assessment Year 2013-14. The Revenue's appeal involved a tax effect of Rs. 13,22,862, which was below the threshold of Rs. 20 lakhs stipulated by the CBDT.
What were the issues?
Whether an appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable when the tax effect is below the threshold limit set by the CBDT.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर Jh fot; iky jko] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k vk;dj vihy la- 562/JP/2018 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ: 2013-14 cuke Deputy Commissioner of Shri Alkesh Patni, F-34, 4th Avenue Lotus Street, Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Jaipur. JLN Marg, Lal Bahadur Nagar (West), Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la- AGJPP 2416 L vihykFkhZ izR;FkhZ jktLo dh vksj ls : Jh ts lh dwygjh (tslhvkÃVh) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls : fel Ã'kk dkuwux¨ (vf|oDrk) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k: 23/08/2018 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k: 23/08/2018 vkns'k Jh fot; iky jko Jh fot; iky jko] U;kf;d lnL; }kjk ] U;kf;d lnL; }kjk Jh Jh fot; iky jko fot; iky jko ] U;kf;d lnL; }kjk ] U;kf;d lnL; }kjk
निधार्रण व’ार् 2013-14 हेतु आयकर आयुक्त ¼अपील½-प्ट जयपुर }ारा पारित vkns'k fnuakd 24/02/2018 ds fo:} funZsf'kr] jktLo foHkkx dh orZeku vihy esa mBk;k x;k gSaA
2- lquokbZ ds nkSjku] fu/kkZfjfr ds fo}ku izkf/kd`r izfrfuf/k us dj izHkko] dsanzh; izR;{k dj cksMZ ds ifji= la[;k 3@2018] fnuakd 11 tqykbZ 2018 ds vuqlkj] :i;s 20 yk[k ls vf/kd u gksus ds dkj.k jktLo dh vihy dh iks’k.kh;rk ij vkifr mBkbZA fo}ku izkf/kd`r izfrfuf/k us izLrqr fd;k fd orZeku ekeys ds rF;ksa ds vuqlkj] jktLo dh vihy esa :i;s 13]22]862@& dk dj izHkko gksus dk mYys[k fd;k x;k gS tks fd :i, 20 yk[k dh fu/kkZfjr lhek ls de gSA
2 ITA No. 562/JP/2018 DCIT Vs. Shri Alkesh Patni 3- fo}ku foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k us izLrqr fd;k fd jktLo dh vihy esa lacaf/kr dj izHkko] dsanzh; izR;{k dj cksMZ }kjk blds iwoZorhZ ifji= la[;k] 21@2015] fnuakd 10-12-2015 dks fujLr djrs gq, tkjh fd, x, i'pkrorhZ ifji= la[;k 3@2018] fnuakd 11 tqykbZ 2018 esa fu/kkZfjr dh xbZ lhek :i, 20 yk[k ls de gSA
4- geus nksuksa i{kksa ds rdksZa dks lquk rFkk vfHkys[k ij miyC/k lkexzh dk voyksdu fd;kA ;g ik;k x;k fd jktLo dh iz'uxr vihy esa ekax@dj izHkko :i;s 20 yk[k ls de gSA vk;dj vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 268 , ¼1½ }kjk iznr 'kfDr;ksa ds varxZr dsanzh; izR;{k dj cksMZ us gky gh esa ifji= la[;k 3@2018] fnuakd 11 tqykbZ 2018 ¼Qk-la[;k-279@izdh.kZ-142@2007&vkbZVhts ¼ihVh½ }kjk v/khUkLFk inkf/kdkfj;ksa dks ;g funs'k tkjh fd, x, gSa fd ,slh vihyksa] ftuesa ekax@dj izHkko :i;s 20 yk[k rd lhfer gks] ds ekeyksa esa jktLo foHkkx }kjk आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण के सम{ा अपील दाखिल नहीं की जांएA उक्त परिप= esa blds lHkh yafcr vihyksa esa iz;kstuh; gksus dk fo'ks’k rkSj ij mYys[k fd;k x;k gSA
5- dqN vioknksa dks NksM+dj] dsanzh; izR;{k dj cksMZ us ;g funs'k fn;k gS fd आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण के सम{ा लंबित ऐसी सभी विभागीय अपीलाें] जिनमें ekax@dj izHkko :i;s 20 yk[k ls vf/kd ugha gS] dks ;k rks okil ys fy;k tkuk pkfg, vFkok foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k;ksa }kjk mu ij tksj ugha fn;k tkuk pkfg,A
6- orZeku vihy dsanzh; izR;{k dj cksMZ ds mDr ifji= esa mfYyf[kr vioknksa esa ls fdlh us ls Hkh vkPNkfnr ugha gksrhA D;ksafd orZeku foHkkxh; vihy esa fooknkLin dj ekax dsanzh; izR;{k dj cksMZ }kjk vihy nkf[ky fd, gsrq fu/kkZfjr lhek ls de gS] dsanzh; izR;{k dj cksMZ ds ifji= la[;k 3@2018] fnuakd 11 tqykbZ 2018 ds izdk'k esa jktLo dh vihy iks’k.kh; ugha gSA
3 ITA No. 562/JP/2018 DCIT Vs. Shri Alkesh Patni rnkuqlkj] vihy ij tksj ugha fn;k tkuk@ vihy dks okil fy;k tkuk ekurs gq, foHkkx dh vihy dks fujLr fd;k tkrk gSA
7- ifj.kkeLo:i] jktLo dh vihy fujLr dh tkrh gSA vkns'k fnuakd 23/08/2018 dks U;k;ky; esa lkoZtfud :i ls mn~?kksf’kr fd;k x;kA Sd/- Sd/- ¼foØe flag ;kno½ ¼fot; iky jko½ ys[kk lnL; U;kf;d lnL; Tk;iqj fnukad- 23 vxLr, 2018 *Ranjan आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेf’ातरू 1. vihykFkhZ 2. izR;FkhZ 3. vk;dj vk;qDr 4. vk;dj vk;qDr 5. विभागीय प्रतिनिधि] आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण]जयपुर 6. xkMZ QkbZy (vk;dj vihy la- 562/JP/2018) vkns'kkuqlkj
सहायक पंजीकार
More judgments on Section 268A(1)
- DCIT., Central Circle-1(3), Hyderabad vs C K Entertainments Private Limited…ITA 967/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: Heard7 Nov 2025AY 2016-17
- DCIT., Central Circle-1(3), Hyderabad vs C K Entertainments Private Limited…ITA 964/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: Heard7 Nov 2025AY 2020-21
- Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Central… vs Radhakrishnan Nair Parameswaran Pillai…ITA 535/COCH/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed22 Aug 2025AY 2018-19
- Assistnat Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS… vs English House, KozhikodeITA 722/COCH/2024[2021-22]Status: Disposed27 Mar 2025AY 2021-22
- Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3), Jalgaon vs Amrut Nana Chaudhari, JalgaonITA 317/PUN/2025[2016-17]Status: Disposed24 Mar 2025AY 2016-17
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Utkal Highways, Bidanasi vs. Union Of INDIAOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Pradeep Kumar Behera vs. Superintendent CGST And Central Excise., CuttackOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Manas Behera vs. Commissioner, CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Pramod Kumar Nayak vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, KendraparaOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Nirmal Kumar Sharma S/O Ram Swroop Sharma vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 16 Oct 2026