DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. G K DAIRY & MILK PRODUCTS PVT. LTD., 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 CBDT circular, which sets a monetary limit of Rs. 20,00,000 for filing appeals, has statutory force. Since the tax effect was below this limit and no exclusion applied, the appeal was not maintainable.
What were the facts?
The Revenue filed an appeal before the ITAT. The assessee contended that the appeal was not maintainable due to a CBDT circular revising the monetary limit for appeals. The tax effect in the appeal was less than Rs. 20,00,000.
What were the issues?
Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable before the ITAT given the tax effect is below the revised monetary limit prescribed by the CBDT circular.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu
ORDER Per L.P. Sahu, A.M.: This appeal at the instance of Revenue arises out of the order passed by the CIT(A) in relation to the captioned assessment year.
During the course of hearing, the ld. DR, although supported the order of the Assessing Officer, but could not controvert the fact that tax effect involved in this appeal is less than Rs.20,00,000/-. The learned counsel, appearing for the assessee, on the other hand, contended that 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/-.
Having considered the rival submissions and the material available on record, including the above Circular, we find that the above circular of CBDT on pecuniary limit has been issued in supersession of earlier CBDT Circular No. 21 of 2015 dated 10.12.2015, revising the monetary limit of tax effect from Rs.10,00,000/- to Rs.20,00,000/-.These Instructions of CBDT have now statutory force within the provisions of section 268A of the IT Act and are made applicable to the pending appeals also by virtue of para 13 of the Circular. This Circular contains clear instructions to the Department to withdraw or not to press such appeals filed before the ITAT wherein tax effect involved does not exceed
More judgments on Section 268A
- Income Tax Officer, Ajmer vs Hemant Kumar Sharma, AjmerITA 1506/JPR/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Income Tax Officer, Indore vs Aashta Doshi, IndoreITA 789/IND/2025[2024-25]Status: Disposed12 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Income Tax Officer Ward -1(2)(3), Ahmedabad vs Khushal Madhavlal Darji, AhmedabadITA 82/AHD/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed25 Sept 2026AY 2022-23
- Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Mehsana vs Hemantkumar Faljibhai Chaudhary, MehsanaITA 475/AHD/2025[2012-13]Status: Disposed25 Sept 2026AY 2012-13
- Dy. CIT-4(1), Indore vs Kiran Bajpai, IndoreITA 426/IND/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed9 Sept 2026AY 2024-25
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Rajkalpana Travels PVT. LTD. vs. Commissioner CGST, Delhi North CommissionerateDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Mahaveer Ispat Traders vs. Principal Commissioner Dgst Delhi Department Of Trade And Taxes Gnctd & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Modern Engineers And Contractors vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St)Andhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- K Madhusudan Reddy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- Sandeep Ranjan Rout vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026