DCIT 9 (2)(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S CONTINNUM MANAGAED SOLUTIONS PVT LTD., MUMBAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that the tax effect was indeed below the prescribed limit and the Revenue could not provide any exceptions. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
What were the facts?
The Revenue filed an appeal before the ITAT. The assessee pointed out that the tax effect in the appeal was below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 for filing appeals before the Tribunal.
What were the issues?
Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable before the ITAT given the tax effect is below the monetary limit specified in 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, “C” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP & SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM
O R D E R ए रयपऔय यहभान, लेखा सदस्य के द्वाया / PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM: This appeal of Revenue is arising out of the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)]-16, Mumbai [in short CIT(A)], dated 30.08.2019. The assessment was framed by the Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-9(2)(2) Mumbai (in short DCIT/ITO/ AO) for the A.Y. 2013-14 vide order dated 15.03.2016
At the outset, the learned Counsel for the assessee stated that the tax effect in this appeal is ₹13,91,820/-, which is below the tax effect as prescribed vide CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 vide F.No. 279/Misc.142/2007-ITJ(Pt.) dated 08.08.2019, wherein the monetary limit for filing of appeal before ITAT is enhanced to ₹50 lacs. We noted that vide this circular No. 17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 an amendment was made to CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 vide F.No. 279/Misc. 142/2007-ITJ (Pt) increasing the monetary limit for filing of appeal before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal i.e. ₹ 50 lacs in each of the case from the monetary limit of ₹20 lacs. We noted that earlier Circular No. 3 of 2018 was made applicable to pending appeals also and this clause of the circular remains unchanged even after the amendment. Admittedly, in this case tax effect is below prescribed limit of ₹ 50 lacs for filing of appeal before the Tribunal.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Shining Steel Through Its Proprietor Kartik Gupta vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Redamancy World Through Its Proprietor Sanjay Kumar Goel vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Arj Exim INDIA vs. Additional Commissioner Of CGST, Appeals-Ii, New Delhi And OrsDelhi · 27 Oct 2026
- The State Of Bihar Through The Commissioner Of State Tax vs. Kaushlendra KumarPatna · 27 Oct 2026
- Ayush Sureshchandra Shah vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 27 Oct 2026