ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SHRI RAVINDER ZUTSHI, NEW DELHI
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 held that the Revenue's appeal was not maintainable as the tax effect of the addition was less than Rs. 20,00,000/-, which is the monetary limit for filing appeals before the Tribunal as per CBDT Circular No. 3/2018. The appeal was dismissed on this procedural ground.
What were the facts?
The Revenue appealed against the deletion of an addition made by the Assessing Officer (AO) regarding the full value of consideration for a property. The AO had determined the consideration at Rs. 1,80,00,000/- against the declared Rs. 81,05,600/-.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was the maintainability of the Revenue's appeal before the Tribunal based on the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT circulars.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “A”: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA & SHRI L.P. SAHU
This is an appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (APPEALS) 21, New Delhi dated 02.04.2016 pertaining to the assessment year 2012-13.
During the course of hearing, the Ld. DR supported the order of the AO and submitted that the full value of consideration determined by the AO at Rs.1,80,00,000/- as against Rs.81,05,600/- declared by assessee, is based on cogent material on record and it needs no interference. It was submitted that, therefore, the addition of difference amount of Rs.98,94,400/- has wrongly been deleted by the ld CIT(A). He, therefore, urged for restoration of assessment order.
On the other hand, the ld. AR of the assessee relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A).
We have heard both the parties and have gone through the entire material on record. A perusal of assessment order reveals that the ld. Assessing Officer while computing the long term capital gain has taken into account the full value of consideration at Rs.1,80,00,000/-, indexed cost of acquisition at Rs.24,98,864/- resulting into long-term capital gain of Rs.1,55,01,136/-. The AO has also given exemption of Rs.68,38,388/- u/s. 54 of the Act and has worked out the taxable long term capital gain at Rs.86,62,748/- and accordingly has made net addition of this amount. We, however, find that the tax effect on this addition does not exceed Rs.20,00,000/-. Therefore, in our opinion, the present appeal of the Revenue is not maintainable in view of recent Circular of CBDT No. 3/2018 dated 11th July, 2018, whereby the monetary limit of tax effect for not filing appeals before the Tribunal has been revised to Rs. 20,00,000/-. It is not the case of the Revenue that the present appeal comes within the sweep of exclusion clauses as given in para No. 10 & 11 of the said Circular. Thus, going by the prescription of the afore-noted CBDT instructions, and without going into merits of the case, we dismiss the instant appeal filed by the Revenue, being not maintainable, as the tax effect involved in this appeal is less than Rs. 20.00 lacs.
In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed as indicated above.
More judgments on Section 54
- Renu Arun Talwar, Mumbai vs Circle 17(1), MumbaiITA 204/MUM/2026[2012-13]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2012-13
- Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(2), Ahmedabad vs Manan Arati Patel, AhmedabadITA 923/AHD/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed6 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
- Rohitbhai Jivrambhai Patel, Vadodara vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward 3(1)(2), VadodaraITA 679/AHD/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
- Rohitbhai Jivrambhai Patel, Vadodara vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward 3(1)(2), VadodaraITA 679/AHD/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
- Dy. Commissioner of Income… vs Thomas Myladiyil Augustine, AhmedabadITA 1131/AHD/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2022-23
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