DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, SURAT, SURAT vs. SAHAJANAND MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED, SURAT
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against an order passed under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Authorized Representative (AR) for the assessee submitted that the tax effect in the present appeal is less than the monetary limit fixed by CBDT Circular No.9 of 2024. The tax effect was stated to be Rs.57,94,197/-, which is below the Rs.60 lakh limit.
Held
The tribunal considered the submissions of both parties. It was noted that the tax effect was less than Rs.60 lakh and the case did not fall under any exemptions mentioned in the relevant circular. Therefore, the appeal was deemed not maintainable.
Key Issues
Whether the appeal is maintainable when the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limit set by the CBDT, and not falling under any exemptions.
Sections Cited
250, 143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: MS. SUCHITRA RAGHUNATH KAMBLE & SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH
आदेश / O R D E R PER BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, AM: This appeal by the assessee emanates from the order passed under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’) dated 13.01.2025 by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-4, Surat [in short ‘Ld. CIT(A)’] for the Assessment Year (AY) 2018-19, which in turn arises out of assessment order passed by Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 28.12.2017.
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-10 of the Form-36, wherein the tax effect is written as Rs.57,94,197/-, which is below the monetary limit of Rs.60 lakhs.
ITA No.349/Srt/2025 A.Y 15-16 Sahajanand Medical Technologies. Ltd. 3. 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 is 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 is liable to be dismissed as not maintainable. 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-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 or the case is covered by any exception in the said Circular. 5. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as indicated above. Order pronounced in accordance with Rule 34 of ITAT Rules, 1963 on 19/09/2025 in the open court. Sd/- Sd/- (SUCHITRA R KAMBLE) (BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH) �याियक सद�य/JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद�य/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER सूरत /Surat �दनांक/ Date: 19/09/2025 Dkp Outsourcing Sr.P.S*
ITA No.349/Srt/2025 A.Y 15-16 Sahajanand Medical Technologies. Ltd. आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant ��यथ�/ The Respondent आयकर आयु�/ CIT आयकर आयु� (अपील)/ The CIT(A) िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण, सूरत/ DR, ITAT, SURAT गाड� फाईल/ Guard File // True Copy // By order/आदेश से, सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, सूरत
