ITO, DEHRADUN vs. SHRI SUNDER SINGH, DEHRADUN
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, with retrospective effect, mandates that appeals with a tax effect below Rs. 20,00,000/- should not be filed or pressed. Therefore, the appeal was not maintainable.
What were the facts?
The Revenue filed an appeal before the ITAT. The assessee's counsel pointed out a CBDT circular revising the monetary limit for filing appeals to the Tribunal to Rs. 20,00,000/-. The tax effect in the present appeal was below this limit.
What were the issues?
Whether an appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable before the ITAT when the tax effect is below the revised monetary limit prescribed by a 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 BENCHES : ‘G’/FRIDAY : NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL & SMT. BEENA A. PILLAI
ORDER R.S. SYAL, VP: The present appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order passed by the CIT(A) on 22.02.2017 in relation to the assessment year 2013-14.
During the course of hearing, the ld. AR submitted that pursuant to the mandate of section 268A the CBDT has issued Circular No. 03 of 2018, dated 11th July, 2018 with retrospective effect, revising the monetary limit to Rs.20,00,000/- for not filing appeals before the Tribunal. He further submitted that as the tax effect involved in the instant appeal is less than Rs.20,00,000/-, the extant appeal is not maintainable. The ld. D.R., 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/-.
We have heard the parties and perused the relevant material on record. Going by the prescription of the aforenoted Circular, it is palpable that the Instruction is applicable to the pending appeals also with retrospective effect and there is a clear-cut direction to the Department to withdraw or not press such appeals filed before the ITAT, wherein tax effect is less than Rs.20,00,000/-. We are, therefore, of the view that the Revenue should have either not filed the instant appeal before the Tribunal or withdrawn the same as the tax effect in this appeal is admittedly less than the prescribed limit, i.e., Rs. 20,00,000/- for not filing the appeal. Accordingly, we dismiss the instant appeal without going into merits of the case. However, the Department is at liberty to file the Miscellaneous Application, if the tax effect is found to be more than the prescribed limit of Rs.20,00,000/- or otherwise.
Accordingly, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed.
In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed.
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 Ashish Enterprises vs. Assistant Commissioner Gsto Ward No. 86Delhi · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Om.S.R. Construction, Through Its Proprietor Mr. Kuldeep Sharma vs. The State Of Jharkhand Through Its Commissioner, Commerical Tax DepartmentJharkhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Bhanwal Trading And Company vs. The Union Of INDIARajasthan · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Saraswati Enterprises vs. State Of RajasthanRajasthan · 28 Oct 2026
- Akshaya Consortium vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Andhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026