INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, NIZAMABAD vs. JANARDHAN GOUD PADALA, NIZAMABAD
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that as per CBDT Circular No. 3/2018, appeals with a tax effect below Rs. 20 lakhs should not be filed before the ITAT. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed.
What were the facts?
The Revenue filed an appeal before the ITAT for AY 2015-16. The tax effect in the appeal was less than Rs. 20 lakhs.
What were the issues?
Whether an appeal filed by the Revenue before the ITAT is maintainable when the tax effect is below the monetary limit prescribed by the CBDT circular.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad ‘ B ‘ Bench, Hyderabad
Before: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S.Rifaur RahmanShri Janardhan Goud
Per Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, J.M.
This is Revenue’s appeal for the A.Y 2015-16 against the order of the CIT (A)-5, Hyderabad, dated 8.5.2018.
It is stated before us that the tax effect in this appeal is less than Rs.20 lakhs and therefore the Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) in exercise of its power vested under Sec. 268A(1) of the I.T. Act comes into play, wherein, the monetary limit for filing the appeals by the Revenue before the ITAT and various High Courts as well as Apex Court are revised with an object of reducing the tax litigation. Vide para 3 of the said circular (supra) it is stated that in cases where the tax effect in the appeals to be filed before the
Page 1 of 2
Janardhan Goud Padala Hyderabad.
Appellate Tribunal does not exceed Rs.20 lakhs appeals should not be filed. Thus taking a note of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018, dated 11.07.2018 and considering the fact that the tax effect in the instant appeal is less than Rs.20 lakhs, the present appeal deserves to be dismissed as not pressed/not maintainable. At the same time we also make it clear that if the appeals fall in any of the exceptions referred to in the above said CBDT Circular, the Revenue is at liberty to move an application for recalling the order, if so, advised.
Accordingly in the light of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018 dated 11.07.2018 the appeals of the Revenue stands dismissed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 3rd December, 2018.
Sd/- Sd/- (S.Rifaur Rahman) (P. Madhavi Devi) Accountant Member Judicial Member
Hyderabad, dated 3rd December, 2018. Vinodan/sps
Copy to: 1 ITO Ward -1, Aayakar Bhavan, Subhash Nagar, Nizamabad 503001 2 Shri Janardhan Goud Padala, H.No.1-30/A, Doodgaon, Kodicherla, Balkonda, Nizamabad 503219 3 CIT (A)-5, Hyderabad 4 Pr. CIT – 5 Hyderabad 5 The DR, ITAT Hyderabad 6 Guard File
By Order
Page 2 of 2
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 →- M/S.Pradeep Kumar Mahapatra, Bhubaneswar vs. Superintendent Bhubaneswar-Iii Circle, CGST Range, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Dillip Kumar Behera vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Mayurbhanj CircleOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Dillip Kumar Behera vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Mayurbhanj CircleOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Tvl.Dev Construction vs. The Proper OfficerMadras · 15 Oct 2026
- Abbal Dass Arya vs. Commissioner State Goods And Services Tax CommissionerUttarakhand · 15 Oct 2026