INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(6), SURAT, ADAJAN vs VIKRAMBHAI MANGALDAS MEHTA, ADAJAN

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, सूरत न्यायपीठ, सूरत IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 628/SRT/2025 (AY 2012-13) (Physical hearing) Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(6), Surat, Room No.303, Anavil Business Centre, Hazira Road, Adajan, Surat-395009 बनाम Vs Vikrambhai Mangaldas Mehta 2, Shankheshwar Apartment, Rander Road, Opp. Navyug College, Adajan, Surat-395 009 [PAN : ABXPM 7448 L] अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से /Assessee by Shri Deep Shah, AR राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by Shri Ajay Uke– Sr-DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing 15.09.2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date of pronouncement 28.11.2025 Order under section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal by assessee is directed against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax, Appeal,Addl/JCIT(A)-8, Mumbai [for short, “Ld. CIT(A)"] dated 17.03.2025 for the assessment year 2012-13, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer (in short, “AO") under section 143(3) r.w.s 147 of Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') on 04.12.2019. 2. At the outset of hearing the Ld. Authorized Representative (AR) for the assessee submits that in the present appeal tax effect is less than the mandatory limit fixed by CBDT Circular No.9 of 2024 dated 17.09.2024. Therefore, the appeal is not maintainable. Ld. AR for the assessee further invited our attention on column-10 of the Form-36, wherein the tax effect is written as Rs.2,43,003/-, which is below the monetary limit of Rs.60 lakhs. Vikrambhai M Mehta

The Ld. DR for the revenue after going through the grounds of appeal and the working of tax effect mentioned in column-10 of Form 36 submits that tax effect since to be less than Rs.60 lakh. It is further seen that the case does not fall under the exemption provided in para 3.1 of Circular No.5/2024 dated 15.03.2024 including clause(h) relating to organized tax evasion including cases of bogus capital gain/loss through penny stock and cases of accommodation entries. Therefore the appeal should be dismissed as not maintainable.

We have considered the submission of both the parties and perused the ground of appeal and the order of Ld. CIT(A). On perusal of order and the working provided in column-10 of Form-36, we find that tax effect involve in the present Revenue's appeal is less than prescribed limit of Rs.60 lakh fixed by CBDT's in its Circular No.9 of 20124 dated 17.09.2024 for filing appeal before the Tribunal. Therefore, this appeal of Revenue is dismissed as not maintainable, however, the Revenue is given liberty to move appropriate application if it is discovered at later stage that the tax effect is more than Rs.60 lakh.

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as indicated above. Order announced at the time of hearing of appeal on 28/11/2025 in the Virtual Court hearing. (BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH) लेखा सदस्य/Accountant Member सूरत / Surat Dated: 28/11/2025 Dkp Outsourcing Sr.P.S* (DINESH MOHAN SINHA) न्यायिक सदस्य/Judicial Member 2 Vikrambhai M Mehta आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेषित/ Copy of the order forwarded to : • अपीलार्थी/ The Appellant • प्रत्यर्थी/ The Respondent • • • आयकर आयुक्त / CIT विभागीय प्रतिनिधि, आयकर अपीलीय आधिकरण, सूरत/ DR, ITAT, SURAT गार्ड फाईल / Guard File //// 3 By order/आदेश से, सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, सूरत", "summary": {"facts": "The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) for the assessment year 2012-13, which originated from an assessment order passed by the AO under section 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee argued that the tax effect was below the mandatory limit set by CBDT Circular No.9 of 2024, making the appeal not maintainable.", "held": "The Tribunal considered the submissions of both parties and the tax effect mentioned in Form-36. It was found that the tax effect in the Revenue's appeal was below the prescribed limit of Rs.60 lakh as per CBDT Circular No.9 of 2024. The Tribunal noted that the case did not fall under any exemption clauses for organized tax evasion.", "result": "Dismissed", "sections": ["143(3)", "147", "254(1)"], "issues": "Whether the appeal is maintainable given the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limit."}}

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(6), SURAT, ADAJAN vs. VIKRAMBHAI MANGALDAS MEHTA, ADAJAN