ITO 22 (1)(5), MUMBAI vs. HARISH C SHAH, MUMBAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that the tax effect was below the prescribed limit of ₹50 lacs as per CBDT Circular No. 17 of 2019. The Departmental Representative could not point out any exceptions. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeals arose from penalty orders under section 271(1)(c) for assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10. The tax effect in these appeals was below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 for filing appeals before the ITAT.
What were the issues?
Whether the appeals filed by the Revenue should be dismissed as withdrawn due to the tax effect being below the monetary limit prescribed by the CBDT circular.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, “H” BENCH, MUMBAI
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
आदेश / O R D E R भहावीय स िंह, उऩाध्मक्ष के द्वाया / PER MAHAVIR SINGH, VP: These appeals of assessee are arising out of the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)]-34, Mumbai, [in short CIT(A)],
At the outset, the learned Counsel for the assessee stated that the tax effects in these appeals are ₹37,103 & ₹1,36,628/- for AYs 2008-09 & 2009-10 respectively, 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.
More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)
- Ajaybhai Dineshbhai Bagdai, Near Central… vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), New…ITA 74/RJT/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
- Shalin Jayantbhai Desai, Vadodara vs ACIT, Circle-4(2), Vadodara Present…ITA 2569/AHD/2026[2010-11]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2010-11
- Neo Structo Construction P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The Pr. CIT- 3, AhmedabadITA 1216/AHD/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Hetal Vinodchandra Sheth, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2370/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Hetal Vinodchandra Sheth, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2369/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S B.K. Agency Under The Proprietor Of Bhola Prasad vs. The Chief Commissioner, CGSTPatna · 2 Nov 2026
- R.K.Service Station, Balasore vs. Commissioner CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- Tankala Soumya vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Rayagada Circle, RayagadaOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Pooja, Town Hallroad, Cuttack vs. State Tax Officer, Cuttack-I West Circle,CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Chicvogue Fashions Lip, Ganjam vs. State Tax Officer Bhubaneswar- Ii CircleOrissa · 31 Oct 2026