DCIT, CHENNAI vs. ACCEL LIMITED, CHENNAI
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 Department's officers. Therefore, the Revenue could not proceed with these appeals.
What were the facts?
The Revenue filed appeals before the ITAT. The tax effect in these cases was less than ₹50 lakhs. The CBDT had issued a circular increasing the monetary limit for filing appeals to the ITAT.
What were the issues?
Whether the Revenue can proceed with appeals before the ITAT when the tax effect is below the revised monetary limit set by the CBDT circular.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN & SHRI S. JAYARAMAN
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
आदेश /O R D E R
PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
These appeals of the Revenue are directed against the respective orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Chennai. We heard all these appeals of the Revenue together and disposing the same by this common order.
On hearing the Ld. Departmental Representative, we find that the tax effect in these cases is less than `50 lakhs. The CBDT in its Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 increased the monetary limit for filing appeal before this Tribunal and instructed its officers to withdraw all the appeals pending before the ITAT where the tax effect is less than `50 lakhs. This Tribunal is of the considered opinion that this Circular of CBDT is binding on the officers of the Department. Therefore, the Revenue cannot proceed further in these appeals. Accordingly, these appeals stand dismissed.
In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue stand dismissed. 3.
Order pronounced in the open court on 23rd August, 2019 at Chennai.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Sita Enterprises vs. Office Of The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- 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