ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (OSD), WARD -1 (4), NASHIK vs. M/S. TOUGH METALIKS PVT.LTD, NASHIK
In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that the tax effect was significantly lower than the monetary limits prescribed by the CBDT for filing appeals. Therefore, the Revenue's appeal was rejected.
What were the facts?
The Revenue filed an appeal before the ITAT for AY 2010-11. The tax effect involved in the appeal was Rs. 50,323/-. The assessee did not appear for the hearing.
What were the issues?
Whether the Revenue's appeal should be entertained when the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limits for appeals.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE
Before: SHRI S.S. GODARA & DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE
Assessee by None Revenue by Shri M.G. Jasnani Date of hearing 06-07-2022 Date of pronouncement 07-07-2022 आदेश / ORDER
PER S.S. GODARA, JM :
This Revenue‟s appeal for A.Y.2010-11 is directed against the CIT(A)-1, Nashik‟s order dated 01.01.2019 passed in case No.Nask/CIT(A)-1/407/2015-16 in proceedings u/s.144 r.w.s 147 of the Income Tax Act, in short “the Act”. Case called twice. None appears at the assessee‟s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.
2 M/s. Tough Metaliks Pvt. Ltd.
We find from the records that the tax effect involved in the instant appeal is Rs.50,323/- only as per the relevant column No.10 in Form 36 herein. We thus quote the CBDT‟s circular no.17/2019 dated 08-08-2019 revising upward the monetary limits for filing of appeals by the department in Income-tax cases before various appellate forums. The earlier circular No.03/2018 dated 11-07-2018 had fixed monetary limit for filing of appeals by the Revenue before the tribunal at Rs.20.00 lakhs which stands enhanced in the Circular dated 08-08-2019 to Rs.50.00 lakhs qua all pending appeals as well. All these facts have gone unrebutted from the Revenue side. We accordingly reject its instant appeal.
This Revenue‟s appeal is dismissed for involving lower than the prescribed tax effect in above terms.
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Capri Global Capital LTD Through Represented By Its Law Officer Mr. Varun Kaljoria vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Principal SecretaryMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Sri Tatiparthy Venkata Swamy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 25 Oct 2026
- Piyush Shantilal Veera vs. State Of U.P.Allahabad · 23 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Pooja Shri Traders vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - 1Madras · 23 Oct 2026
- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026