THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, GURDASPUR vs. SH. BALDEV SINGH S/O SH. CHANAN SINGH, GURDASPUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the appeal filed by the Revenue was not maintainable as the 'tax effect' was below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT instructions. Consequently, the Revenue's appeal and the assessee's cross-objection were dismissed.
What were the facts?
The Revenue filed an appeal against an order of the CIT(A) that allowed the assessee's appeal. The appeal was filed for Assessment Year 2011-12.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was the maintainability of the Revenue's appeal before the Tribunal based on the prescribed monetary limits for 'tax effect'.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR.
Before: SH. SANJAY ARORA & SH. N. K. CHOUDHRY
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. SANJAY ARORA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. N. K. CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I. T. A. No. 306/(Asr)/2016 Assessment Year: 2011-12
Income Tax Officer, vs. Baldev Singh s/o Chanan Singh, Ward-6(4), Gurdaspur Vill. Gossal, P.O. Buche Nangal, Gurdaspur [PAN: DNZPS 9959D] (Appellant) (Respondent)
Cross Objection No. 14/Asr/2016 (arising out of ITA No. 306/Asr/2016) Assessment Year: 2011-12
Baldev Singh s/o Chanan Singh, vs. Income Tax Officer, Vill. Gossal, P.O. Buche Ward-6(4), Gurdaspur Nangal, Gurdaspur [PAN: DNZPS 9959D] (Cross Objector) (Respondent)
Appellant by : Sh. Charan Das, Sr. D.R. Respondent by: None Date of Hearing: 29.10.2018 Date of Pronouncement: 29.10.2018
ORDER Per Sanjay Arora, AM: This is an Appeal by the Revenue arising out of the Order by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Amritsar (‘CIT(A)’ for short) dated 28.02.2016, allowing the assessee’s appeal contesting his assessment under section
2 ITA No. 306&CO 14/Asr/2016 (AY 2011-12) Baldev Singh 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' hereinafter) dated 25.09.2014 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2011-12. The assessee has filed a cross objection.
At the outset, it was observed by the Bench that ‘tax effect’ of the instant appeal is below Rs. 20 lacs, i.e., the threshold monetary limit applicable for the Revenue’s appeals before the Tribunal u/s. 268A of the Act as per the latest Instruction, i.e., No. 3 of 2018, dated 11.07.2018, by the CBDT, so that it is not maintainable. With reference to the grounds of appeal assumed before us as well as the assessment order, it was confirmed by the Bench that the ‘tax effect’ is below Rs. 20 lacs inasmuch as the additions under challenge is for Rs. 54.02 lacs.
Section 268A of the Act provides that an appellate authority, including the Appellate Tribunal, shall have regard to the instructions, directions, orders, etc. issued by the Board from time to time fixing monetary limits for the purpose of regulating the filing of appeals by the Revenue before the different appellate authorities, and which shall, while deciding those appeals, have regard to the said limits. The monetary limit fixed per the latest instruction supra for the appeals before the tribunal is Rs. 20 lacs.
Under the circumstances, therefore, the instant appeal, being covered by section 268A read with the applicable instruction cited supra, which is to apply for pending appeals as well, is not maintainable. The Revenue’s appeal is accordingly dismissed in limine as not maintainable. The assessee’s CO is also rendered unfructuous and, thus, not maintainable. We decide accordingly.
In the result, both the Revenue’s appeal and assessee’s CO are dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on October 29, 2018 Sd/- Sd/- (N. K. Choudhry) (Sanjay Arora) Judicial Member Accountant Member
3 ITA No. 306&CO 14/Asr/2016 (AY 2011-12) Baldev Singh Date: 29.10.2018 /GP/Sr. Ps. Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) The Appellant: Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(4) Gurdaspur (2) The Respondent: Baldev Singh s/o Chanan Singh, Vill. Gossal, P.O. Buche Nangal, Gurdaspur (3) The CIT(Appeals)-2, Amritsar (4) The CIT concerned (5) The Sr. DR, I.T.A.T. True Copy
By Order
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 →- Dwaraka Jewellers, Bhubaneswar vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S N D Waddar And Co vs. Sri Gaurav GuptaKarnataka · 30 Oct 2026
- Kanwar Enterprises Private Limited vs. The Joint Commissioner - State TaxTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Bangi Mines And Minerals vs. The State Of TelanganaTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Arka Business Solutions vs. Principal Commissioner Of CustomsTelangana · 30 Oct 2026