DCIT, DEHRADUN vs. M/S KANATAL RESORTS & SPA P.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 is binding on the revenue authorities. Since the tax effect in this appeal was less than Rs. 20 lakhs, the appeal was not maintainable.
What were the facts?
The Department appealed an order of the CIT(A) that deleted a tax demand of Rs. 32,72,560/-. The Revenue's appeal was filed despite a CBDT circular stating that appeals with a tax effect below Rs. 20 lakhs should not be filed.
What were the issues?
Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable before the Tribunal given the tax effect is below the 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
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “C”: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI & SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI
O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M.
This appeal filed by the Department is directed against the order dated 15.07.2015 of ld CIT(A), Dehradun for the Assessment Year 2008-09, wherein, demand of tax u/s 153A(1)(b) of Rs. 3272560/- levied by the ld AO is deleted.
At the outset of the hearing itself, the ld. DR brought to our attention that CBDT vide Circular No.03/2018 dated 11TH July 2018 has decided that the revenue would not prefer an appeal before the Tribunal if the tax effect is less than Rs.20 lakhs. Therefore, he pleaded that the appeal of the revenue be decided as per the instruction of the CBDT. Ld AR also reiterated same facts.
We have heard both the sides on the issue and perused the material. We find that the CBDT vide circular dated 11th July 2018 has revised the monetary limit for filing the appeal by the department before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hon’ble High Courts and Hon’ble Supreme Court. The relevant para of the aforesaid circular is reproduced as under :- “3. Henceforth, appeals/SLPs shall not be filed in cases where the tax effect does not exceed the monetary limits given hereunder :- Page | 1
More judgments on Section 153A(1)(b)
- Kalinda Ramdas Gaikwad, Aurangabad vs DCIT Central Circle 2 Aurangabad, AurangabadITSSA 37/PUN/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed12 Aug 2026AY 2015-16
- Kalinda Ramdas Gaikwad, Aurangabad vs DCIT Central Circle 2 Aurangabad, AurangabadITSSA 36/PUN/2026[2014-15]Status: Disposed12 Aug 2026AY 2014-15
- Kalinda Ramdas Gaikwad, Aurangabad vs DCIT Central Circle 2 Aurangabad, AurangabadITSSA 35/PUN/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed12 Aug 2026AY 2017-18
- Kalinda Ramdas Gaikwad, Aurangabad vs DCIT Central Circle 2 Aurangabad, AurangabadITSSA 34/PUN/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed12 Aug 2026AY 2016-17
- Rohit Aggarwal, Ambala vs DCIT, Central Circle-2, Chandigarh, Central…ITA 428/CHANDI/2025[2016-17]Status: Disposed9 Mar 2026AY 2016-17
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- 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
- M/S. V J Petro Products vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St) - IiiAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Asian Aura vs. Government Of Nct Of Delhi And Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026