ITO 8(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. SHREE SHANTINATH REAL ESTATE PVT. LTD., MUMBAI
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 dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue as not maintainable, citing CBDT circulars that enhanced monetary limits for filing appeals. The Revenue was allowed to file a miscellaneous application if the issue fell under exceptions.
What were the facts?
The Revenue filed an appeal before the ITAT against an order of the CIT(A). The tax effect involved in the appeal was less than Rs. 50 lacs.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was the maintainability of the Revenue's appeal before the ITAT based on the monetary limits prescribed by CBDT circulars.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
None
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “G”, BENCH MUMBAI
O R D E R PER AMARJIT SINGH (J.M): This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against order of the CIT(A)- 14, Mumbai dated 01/01/2018 and it pertains to AY 2012-13.
We have heard argument advanced by the Ld. Representative of the Department and has gone through the case carefully. During course of hearing, ld. DR for the revenue submitted that tax effect involved in this appeal filed by the revenue is less than Rs. 50 lacs and in view of latest CBDT circular No. 3/2018 dated 11-7-2018, and also modified circular No. 17/2019 dated 08/08/2019, appeal filed by the revenue is not maintainable and needs to be dismissed. The Ld. DR, further argued that, the issue involved in this appeal is appears to be covered by exception provided under clause (e) of subsequent circular and therefore, if required the revenue shall be allowed to file miscellaneous application to re-call the order. We, find that, the CBDT, recently had issued a circular no. 3/2018 dated 11-7-2018, superseding its earlier circular no. 21/2015 and enhanced monetary limit for filing appeal before various appellate authorities and accordingly, enhanced monetary limit to Rs.20,00,000/- for filing appeal before the Tribunal. Further, the board has issued one more circular vide ITA No3051/M/2018 A.Y.2012-13 Circular no.17/2019 dated 08/08/2019 and enhanced monetary limit for filing appeal before appellate Tribunal to Rs. 50,00,000/-. Further, in the said circular, the CBDT had instructed its officer’s to file application for withdrawal of appeal already filed or not to pursue pending appeals. We, therefore, by taking into account the CBDT circular No. 3/2018 dated 11-7-2018 and Circular no.17/2019 dated 08/08/2019 and also considering the fact that tax effect involved in the present appeal is less than the amount of monetary limit fixed by the CBDT for not filing appeal, dismissed appeal filed by the revenue as not maintainable. We, further noted that the Co-ordinate bench of ITAT, Ahmedabad ‘A’ Bench in vide order dated 14/08/2019 has passed detailed order considering new circular issued by the CBDT and held that except amendment to para 3 of the circular No.3/2018 dated 11/07/2018, all other portions of the circular No.03/2018 (supra) have remain in fact, therefore, this circular is applicable even for pending appeals and accordingly, rejected the arguments of the revenue that the effect of the circular shall come into force from the date of issue of this circular. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of this case and also taken note of circulars issued by the CBDT including circular No. 17/2019 dated 08/08/2019, and also by following the decision of Co-ordinate Bench, we dismissed appeal filed by the revenue as not maintainable. However, we keep open option to the revenue to file a miscellaneous application, if necessary, in case the issues involved in the present appeal comes within 3 exceptions as provided in para 10 of said circular and clause (e) of subsequent circular.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of The Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of The Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Surya Prakash Aroma vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh And 2 OthersAllahabad · 27 Oct 2026
- Mrs. Aqsa Begum vs. Union Of INDIATelangana · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Govindjee Dairy Milk Private Limited vs. Central Goods And Services TaxRajasthan · 27 Oct 2026