INCOME-TAX OFFICER vs. SHRI HANUMAN VITTHAL GOWARI, RAIGAD
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 noted that the tax effect in the appeals was below the limits prescribed by the CBDT Circular No. 3/2018. Therefore, the appeals filed by the Revenue were not maintainable.
What were the facts?
The Revenue filed appeals against orders passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income-tax Act for the assessment year 2005-06. The appeals were filed by the Income Tax Officer against Shri Eknath Vitthal Gowari and Shri Hanuman Vitthal Gowari.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was the maintainability of the Revenue's appeals due to a low tax effect, as per CBDT circulars.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
आदेश / ORDER
PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM:
Both the appeals filed by Revenue are against separate orders of CIT(A)-2, Aurangabad, both dated 22.03.2016 relating to assessment year 2005-06 against respective orders passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’).
Both the appeals filed by Revenue relating to related assessee were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience.
The learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue fairly admitted that the tax effect arising in the present appeals is below the limits prescribed in the CBDT Circular No.3/2018, dated 11.07.2018. Hence, the appeals of Revenue are not maintainable.
In the result, both the appeals of Revenue are dismissed.
Order pronounced on this 15th day of October, 2018.
Sd/- Sd/- (ANIL CHATURVEDI) (SUSHMA CHOWLA) ऱेखा सदस्य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER न्याययक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER ऩुणे / Pune; ददनाांक Dated : 15th October, 2018. GCVSR
ITA Nos.1308 & 1309/PUN/2016 3
आदेश की प्रयतलऱपप अग्रेपषत/Copy of the Order is forwarded to : 1. अऩीऱाथी / The Appellant; 2. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent; 3. आयकर आयुक्त(अऩीऱ) / The CIT(A)-2, Aurangabad; 4. The Pr.CIT-2, Thane; ववभागीय प्रतततनधध, आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, ऩुणे “ए” / DR 5. ‘A’, ITAT, Pune; 6. गार्ड पाईऱ / Guard file. आदेशािुसार/ BY ORDER, सत्यावऩत प्रतत //True Copy// वररष्ठ तनजी सधिव / Sr. Private Secretary आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण ,ऩुणे / ITAT, Pune
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Capri Global Capital LTD Through Represented By Its Law Officer Mr. Varun Kaljoria vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Principal SecretaryMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Sri Tatiparthy Venkata Swamy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 25 Oct 2026
- Piyush Shantilal Veera vs. State Of U.P.Allahabad · 23 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Pooja Shri Traders vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - 1Madras · 23 Oct 2026
- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026