DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), CHENNAI vs. A.VIVEKANANDAN, CHENNAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the tax effect in the appeal was below the monetary limit of Rs. 20 lakhs specified by CBDT Circular No. 3/2018. Therefore, the Revenue's appeal could not proceed.
What were the facts?
The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order which allowed the assessee's appeal. The Assessing Officer had made an addition of Rs. 22,00,000/- as unexplained investment.
What were the issues?
Whether the Revenue's appeal should be dismissed due to the tax effect being below the prescribed monetary limit as per CBDT circular.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY & SHRI S. JAYARAMAN
आदेश / O R D E R
PER S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
The Revenue filed this appeal against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-18, Chennai in 18 dated 12.07.2018 for the assessment year 2005-06.
Shri A.Vivekanandan, the assessee, is an individual. While making the assessment for the assessment year 2005-06, the Ld.AO made addition of Rs.22,00,000/- as unexplained investment U/s.69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A). The Ld.CIT(A) allowed the appeal. Aggrieved against that order, the Revenue filed this appeal before this Tribunal.
At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR submitted that the tax effect is below Rs.20 lakhs and hence the Revenue’s appeal would be covered by the CBDT Circular No.3/2018 dated 11.07.2018, fixing the monetary limit of Rs.20 lakhs. The Ld.DR on verification admitted that the tax effect involved in the appeal is less than Rs.20 lakhs.
On hearing both sides, we find that the tax effect in this case is less than Rs. 20 lakhs. The CBDT in its Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 instructed its officers to withdraw all the appeals pending before the ITAT where the tax effect is less than Rs. 20 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 this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal stands dismissed.
In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.
Order pronounced on the 24th July, 2019 at Chennai.
More judgments on Section 69
- Azure Knowledge Corporation Private… vs The Dy.CIT, Circle-1(1)(1), AhmedabadITA 2013/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Naresh Chandra Khattar, Agra vs ITO Ward-1(1)(2), AgraITA 475/AGR/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Ranchhodbhai Kurjibhai Kakadiya, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), RajkotITA 553/RJT/2025[2019-20]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Gorantla Rahul Kumar, Visakhapatnam vs The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 670/VIZ/2025[2021-22]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Gorantla Rahul Kumar, Visakhapatnam vs The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 669/VIZ/2025[2020-21]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Mehra Mac Industries Private Limited vs. The Deputy State Tax OfficerTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- Santosh Das And Anr. vs. Union Of INDIACalcutta · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S Rama Krishna Industries vs. State Of Hp And OthersHimachal Pradesh · 30 Oct 2026
- Smt Usha W/O Shri Tarun vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Maruti Nandan Minetech Private Limited vs. The Joint CommissionerRajasthan · 29 Oct 2026