Loading judgment…
Facts
The Revenue filed an appeal and the assessee filed a cross-objection against an order of the NFAC. The Revenue's appeal was delayed, but the delay was condoned. During the hearing, the assessee pointed out that the tax effect in the appeal was below the monetary limit set by a CBDT circular.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the tax effect in the Revenue's appeal was Rs.13,57,184/-, which was below the prescribed monetary limit. The cross-objection filed by the assessee was rendered infructuous due to the dismissal of the Revenue's appeal.
Key Issues
Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable when the tax effect is below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT circulars.
Sections Cited
250, 1961
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH KOLKATA
Before: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey
Assessment Year: 2014-15 DCIT, Circle-1(1), Kolkata.…………..……………….……….……….……Appellant vs. Rural Engineering Co. Pvt. Ltd….……………………….....……...…..…..Respondent 20 Maharshi Debendra Road, Kol- 7. [PAN: AABCR2672P] C.O. 89/Kol/2025 (in Assessment Year: 2014-15 Rural Engineering Co. Pvt. Ltd.….……………. ….……….……….……Cross-Objector 20 Maharshi Debendra Road, Kol- 7. [PAN: AABCR2672P] vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Kolkata...………………….…………...…..…………….Respondent Appearances by: Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, FCA, appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri Sanat Kr. Raha, DR, appeared on behalf of the Revenue. Date of concluding the hearing : December 03, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order : December 23, 2025 ORDER Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member:
The appeal has been preferred by the Revenue and cross-objection by the assessee against the order dated 20.02.2025 of the NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(A)’] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’).
C.O. 89/Kol/2025 Rural Engineering Co. Pvt. Ltd 2. The Registry informed that there is delay in filing of the appeal by the Revenue by 83 days and condonation petition for the said delay has been filed by the revenue. On perusal of the contents of the condonation petition, we find that the reasons mentioned therein are valid and reasonable. Hence, we condone the delay and admit the appeal of the revenue for adjudication.
At the time of hearing, the ld. AR vide his letter dated 03.12.2025 3. stated that the instant appeal filed by the revenue is below the monetary limit as per Circular No.9/2024 dated 17.09.2024 issued by CBDT as the tax effect involved in this appeal is 13,57,184/- and the appeal may be dismissed.
Contrary to that, the ld. DR did not object to the above contention of the ld. AR.
Upon hearing the contentions of both the parties and perusing the materials available on record, we find that the assessee filed a letter dated 03.12.2025 wherein it is stated that the revenue wrongly mentioned tax effect involved at Rs.2,27,39,310/- in the grounds raised in this appeal whereas the correct calculation of the tax effect involved in this appeal is Rs.13,57,184/-. In terms of the above and considering the records before us, we dismiss the instant appeal filed by the revenue as the same is below the monetary limit as prescribed by CBDT circular dated 17.09.24.
The consequential cross-objection i.e. C.O No.89/Kol/2025 filed by the assessee is rendered infructuous as the present appeal of the revenue is dismissed due to low tax effect.
Kolkata, the 23rd December, 2025.