INCOME TAX OFFICER-1, BAHRAICH vs. SHRI GAURI SHANKAR, HUF, BAHRAICH
In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
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. 3. 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 tax on the total income assessed and the tax that would have been chargeable, had such
2 ITA No. 10/Lkw/2018
total income been reduced by the amount of income in respect of issues against which appeal is intended to be filed. This Circular further states that tax will not include any interest thereon, unless the chargeability of interest itself is in dispute. In paragraph 13, which is reproduced as under, it has been mentioned in the Circular, that this instruction will apply even to pending appeals: "13. This instruction will apply to SLPs/appeals/cross objections/ references to be filed henceforth in SC/HCs/Tribunal and it shall also apply retrospectively to pending SLPs/appeals/cross objections/references. Pending appeals below the specified tax limits in para 3 above may be withdrawn/not pressed. " 4. The tax effect in this appeal does not exceed Rs.20 lakhs. In view of this fact, as per the CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11th July, 2018 file no.279 of Misc.142/2007-ITJ(PT), the Revenue is not supposed to press this appeal. We, therefore, dismiss the appeal filed by the Revenue in limine, without going into the merits of the case, as in our opinion, the Circular issued by the CBDT is binding on the Departmental Authorities in view of the provisions of Section 268A(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The said view has been taken by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Navnit Lal Jhaveri vs. K. K. Sen, 56 ITR 198 (SC). We, accordingly, dismiss the appeal filed by the Revenue. 5. In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed. (Order pronounced in the open court on 31/01/2019)
Sd/- Sd/- (T.S. Kapoor) (A.D. Jain) Accountant Member Vice President Aks – Dtd. 31 /01/2019
3 ITA No. 10/Lkw/2018
Copy of order forwarded to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) Commissioner (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File
By order
Assistant Registrar
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 →- Sushama Mishra vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Saudamini Samantray vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Bhubaneswar IiOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Keshav Rice Mill, Ganjam vs. Chief Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, KatakaOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Nanda Contruction PVT. LTD., Angul vs. Additional Commissioner, GST And Central Excise Commissionerate, SundergarhOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Utkal Suppliers,Ganjam vs. Assistant Commissioner Of CT And GST, Ganjam-I Circle,GanjamOrissa · 28 Oct 2026