DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, SURAT, SURAT vs. D NAVINCHANDRA EXPORTS PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 154/SRT/2025Status: DisposedITAT Surat19 September 2025AY 2018-19Bench: MS. SUCHITRA RAGHUNATH KAMBLE (Judicial Member), SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the tax effect of the Revenue's appeal was below the prescribed limit of Rs. 60 lakhs as per CBDT Circular No. 9 of 2024. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as not maintainable.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed an order of the CIT(A) for AY 2018-19. The assessee filed a cross-objection. The primary issue revolved around the tax effect of the appeal, which was claimed to be below the monetary limit set by the CBDT.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable given the tax effect is below the monetary limit prescribed by the CBDT circular. Whether the cross-objection requires adjudication if the main appeal is dismissed.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Before: MS. SUCHITRA RAGHUNATH KAMBLE & SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH

Hearing: 21/08/2025Pronounced: 19/09/2025

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No.154/SRT/2025
CO No.2/SRT/2025

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

आदेश / O R D E R

PER BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, AM:

1.

This appeal by the Revenue and Cross Objection (CO) by the assessee emanate from the order passed under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 CO 2/Srt/2025 A.Y 18-19 D Navinchandra Exports P. Ltd (in short, 'the Act’) dated 12.12.2024 Commissioner of Income tax(Appeals)-4, Surat [in short, ‘the CIT(A)’] for the assessment year (AY) 2018-19, which in turn arises out of assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer (in short, ‘AO’) u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act on 31.03.2023.

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 monetary 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 No.11 of Form-36A, wherein the tax effect is written as Rs.52,17,839/-, which is below the monetary limit of Rs.60 lakhs. He has also filed a letter calculating the tax effect on the additions which are the subject-matter of appeal by the revenue in . The tax effect comes to Rs.52,51,665/-, which is below the monetary limit of Rs.60 lakhs.

3.

The Ld. DR for the revenue after going through the grounds of appeal

and the working of tax effect stated that same is less than Rs.60 lakh. He, however, submitted that the Department may be given the liberty to approach the Tribunal if it is discovered subsequently that the tax effect is more.

4. 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-11 of Form-36A, 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 or the case is covered by any exception in the said Circular.

6. Since the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed as non maintainable, the CO No.2/SRT/2025 of the appellant does not require adjudication.

7.

In the result, CO of assessee is also dismissed as infructuous.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →