INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, NIZAMABAD vs. MOHAN REDDY CHAMAKURA, NIZAMABAD
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as not pressed/not maintainable due to the low tax effect, in line with CBDT Circular No. 3/2018. The issues raised were left open for future proceedings.
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 ITAT noted the CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 which mandates not filing appeals with a tax effect below Rs. 20 lakh.
What were the issues?
Whether an appeal filed by the Revenue with a tax effect below the prescribed monetary limit in the CBDT circular is maintainable before the ITAT.
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 24.04.2018 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-2, Nizamabad 2) Mohan Reddy Chamakura, Nizamabad C/o Sri Mohan Reddy Chamakura, 2-91, Boargaon (P), Nizamabad 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 →- M/S South INDIA Trading Company vs. Additional Commissioner Adjudication CGST Delhi North & Anr.Delhi · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S Rishi Stonex vs. The State Of Assam And 5 OthersGauhati · 13 Oct 2026
- Gopal Datt vs. Vishal Kumar SharmaUttarakhand · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S Do Nam Enterprise And Anr vs. The Union Of INDIA And 2 OrsGauhati · 13 Oct 2026
- M Sundaravel vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Central GST And Central ExciseMadras · 13 Oct 2026