DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-6, LUCKNOW vs. SHRI FURQUAN ALI, LUCKNOW
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue in limine. This was based on the CBDT Circular which is binding on the Departmental Authorities, and the tax effect being below the prescribed limit.
What were the facts?
The Revenue filed an appeal before the ITAT. The tax effect in dispute was less than Rs. 20 lakhs. The CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 directs that no appeal should be filed before the Tribunal if the tax effect does not exceed Rs. 20 lakhs.
What were the issues?
Whether the Revenue's appeal should be dismissed due to low tax effect as per CBDT circular, without considering the merits of the case.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- Navnitlal C. Javeri v. K.K. Sen230 citing56 ITR 198 · 1965 · SC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, LUCKNOW BENCH “A”, LUCKNOW
Before: SHRI A.D JAIN & SHRI T.S. KAPOOR
PER: A.D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT:
This appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order of the ld. CIT(A)-I, Lucknow, dated 11/10/2017 for Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. We note that in this appeal filed by the Revenue, the tax effect on the income in dispute is less than Rs.20 lakhs.
The Central Board of Direct Taxes, vide Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11th July, 2018 file no.279 of Misc.142/2007-ITJ (PT), has issued the direction in supersession of the Instruction No.21/2015 dated 10th December, 2015 in consonance with the power entrusted under section 268A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 that no appeal should be filed before the Tribunal in case the tax effect does not exceed Rs.20 lakhs. The "tax effect" in this regard means the difference between the ta
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 268A
- Income Tax Officer, Ajmer vs Hemant Kumar Sharma, AjmerITA 1506/JPR/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Income Tax Officer, Indore vs Aashta Doshi, IndoreITA 789/IND/2025[2024-25]Status: Disposed12 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Income Tax Officer Ward -1(2)(3), Ahmedabad vs Khushal Madhavlal Darji, AhmedabadITA 82/AHD/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed25 Sept 2026AY 2022-23
- Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Mehsana vs Hemantkumar Faljibhai Chaudhary, MehsanaITA 475/AHD/2025[2012-13]Status: Disposed25 Sept 2026AY 2012-13
- Dy. CIT-4(1), Indore vs Kiran Bajpai, IndoreITA 426/IND/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed9 Sept 2026AY 2024-25
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dillip Kumar Behera vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Mayurbhanj CircleOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Kalinga Paper Mart, Sundergarh vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Kabita Nayak vs. Chief Commissioner, CGST, Central Excise And Customs, KhurdaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Swastika Ingot PVT.LTD, Sundargarh vs. The Addl Commissioner, GST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Basudev Logistics, Jagatsinghpur vs. Principal Commissioner, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026