INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3, NIZAMABAD vs. RAMESH PAMU, NIZAMABAD
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as not maintainable, citing the CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 due to the low tax effect. The issues raised in the appeal were left open for future examination.
What were the facts?
The Revenue filed an appeal before the ITAT. The tax effect in the appeal was less than Rs. 20 lakh. The CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 mandates that appeals with a tax effect below Rs. 20 lakh should not be filed.
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 CBDT Circular No. 3/2018.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCH “B”, HYDERABAD
Before: SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI & SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN
PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, A.M.:
This appeal filed by the revenue is directed against the order dated 26.04.2018 of CIT(A)-5, Hyderabad for 2015-16.
It is stated before us that the tax effect in this appeal is less than Rs.20 lakh 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 the 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 Appellate Tribunal does not
exceed Rs.20 lakh, the 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 lakh, the present appeal deserves to be dismissed as not pressed/not maintainable. However, we make it clear that the issues raised in the instant appeal is left open to be examined in the appropriate proceedings, if arises, in future. At the same time, we also make it clear that if the appeal falls 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 appeal stands dismissed.
Pronounced in the open Court on 03.08.2018.
Sd/- Sd/- (P. MADHAVI DEVI) (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Hyderabad, Dated: 03.08.2018 kv Copy to:- 1) ITO, Ward-3, Nizamabad 2) Ramesh Pamu, Nizamabad C/o Sri Ramesh Pamu, 6-7-20, Ram Nilayam, RK Road, Subhash Nagar, Nizamabad - 503 002 3) The CIT(A)-5, Hyderabad 4) The Pr. CIT, Hyderabad 5) The DR, ITAT, Hyderabad 6) Guard File
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
- Tvl.Dev Construction vs. The Proper OfficerMadras · 15 Oct 2026
- Abbal Dass Arya vs. Commissioner State Goods And Services Tax CommissionerUttarakhand · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Darbesh Medical Enterprise vs. State Of West Bengal And Ors.Calcutta · 15 Oct 2026
- J M Mhatre Infra PVT. LTD Thr. Authorized Chetan J. Mhatre vs. Union Of INDIA Thr. Secretary Dept. Of Revenue Ministry Of Finance And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026