ITO, WARD - 13(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. TARANG BUILDERS PVT. LTD., HOWRAH
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 appeal was not maintainable as it was filed against the policy decision of the Department and the tax effect was below the monetary limit prescribed by the CBDT circular.
What were the facts?
The Revenue filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) cancelling the penalty imposed by the AO. The tax effect of the appeal was less than Rs. 20 lacs.
What were the issues?
Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable before the Tribunal when the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limit as per CBDT circulars.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- Commissioner of Customs v. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.501 citing267 ITR 272 · 2004 · SC · Read judgment
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH: KOLKATA
Before: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri A. T. Varkey, JM]
ORDER
Per Shri A.T.Varkey, JM
1. This appeal has been filed by the revenue against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-5, Kolkata dated 26.03.2018 for AY 2014-15 cancelling the penalty imposed by AO u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”).
At the time of hearing, we note that the revenue has preferred this appeal which has tax effect of less than Rs. 20 lacs, therefore, the revenue’s appeal is not maintainable in the light of the CBDT Circular No.3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 wherein CBDT has directed as under: “3 . Henceforth, appeals/ SLPs shall not be filed in cases where the tax effect does not exceed the monetary limits given hereunder: Sl. No. Appeals/SLP’s in Income-tax matters Monetary Limit (in Rs) 1. Before Appellate Tribunal 20,00,000/- 2. Before High Court 50,00,000/- 3. Before Supreme Court 1,00,00,000/- It is clarified that an appeal should not be filed merely because the tax effect in a case exceeds the monetary limits prescribed above. Filing of appeal in such cases is to be decided on merits of the case. 4. For this purpose, 'tax effect' means the difference between the tax on the total income assessed and the tax that would have been chargeable had such total income been Tarang Builders Pvt. Ltd., AY- 2014-15 reduced by the amount of income in respect of the issues against which appeal is intended to be filed (hereinafter referred to as 'disputed issues’). Further, 'tax effect' shall be tax including applicable surcharge and cess. However, the tax will not include any interest thereon, except where chargeability of interest itself is in dispute. In case the chargeability of interest is the issue under dispute, the amount of interest shall be the tax effect. In cases where returned loss is reduced or assessed as income, the tax effect would include notional tax on disputed additions. In case of penalty orders, the tax effect will mean quantum of penalty deleted or reduced in the order to be appealed against.”
In para-13 of the said circular it has further been clarified that the revised monetary limits will apply retrospectively. The relevant para-13 of the Circular reads thus: “13. This Circular will apply to SLPs/appeals/cross objections/references to be filed henceforth in SC/HCs/Tribunal and it shall also apply retrospectively to pending SLPs/appeals/cross objections/references. Pending appeals below the specified tax limits in para 3 above may be withdrawn/not pressed.
In the present case, the tax effect in this appeal by the revenue is less than Rs.20,00,000/-. Though this appeal had been filed by the revenue on 06.07.2018 and was within the monetary limit in the form of tax effect for filing appeal before Tribunal, in view of para-13 of the Circular of CBDT, even such appeal will be governed by the new monetary limits laid down in the CBDT Circular No.3/2018 referred to above.
It is a settled law that the Circulars issued by CBDT are binding on the Revenue. This position was confirmed by the Apex Court in the case of Commissioner of Customs vs Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. reported in 267 ITR 272 wherein their Lordships examined the earlier decisions of the Apex Court with regard to binding nature of the Circular and laid down that when a circular issued by the Board remains in operation then the Revenue is bound by it and cannot be allowed to plead that it is not valid or that it is contrary to the terms of the statute.
In the event, the Revenue finds at a later point of time that the tax effect in the appeal is more than Rs.20 lakhs or despite low tax effect the appeal of the revenue is maintainable, the revenue is at liberty to move this Tribunal for recalling of this order.
Tarang Builders Pvt. Ltd., AY- 2014-15 7. In view of the above, we hold that the appeal filed by the Department, against the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A), is contrary to the policy decision of the Department and as such the appeal filed by the Department is dismissed in limine. 8. In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed. Order is pronounced in the open court. Sd/- Sd/- (P. M. Jagtap) (Aby. T. Varkey) Vice President Judicial Member Dated : 23rd January, 2019 Jd.(Sr.P.S.) Copy of the order forwarded to:
Appellant – ITO, Ward-13(4), Kolkata . 2 Respondent – M/s. Tarang Builders Pvt. Ltd., 94/1, Dr. Abani Dutta Road, Howrah-711101 3. CIT(A)-5, Kolkata. (sent through e-mail) CIT- , Kolkata. 4.
5. DR, ITAT, Kolkata. (sent through e-mail)
Similar judgments
Other orders that rely on the same authority or decide the same section.
- The ACIT, Circle-6, Surat vs M/S. Maa Krupa Construction Company, SuratSurat12 Nov 2020Dismissed
Also relies on Commissioner of Customs v. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.
The Tribunal held that the appeal filed by the Revenue was contrary to the CBDT Circular No. 17/2019, which sets higher monetary limits for filing appeals. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed in limine.
- ITO, Ward-13(1), Kolkata vs M/S. Diamond Scaffolding Co. Pvt. Ltd…Kolkata5 Dec 2018Dismissed
Also relies on Commissioner of Customs v. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.
The Tribunal held that CBDT circulars are binding on the Revenue and that the appeal filed by the Revenue was contrary to the departmental policy. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed in limine.
- DCIT, Circle-10(1), Kolkata vs M/S Akzo Nobel Coatings India Pvt. Ltd…Kolkata29 Aug 2018Dismissed
Also relies on Commissioner of Customs v. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.
The Tribunal held that the revenue's appeal with a tax effect below the prescribed limit was not maintainable and dismissed it. The Tribunal also confirmed the deletion of penalty, stating that the assessee's mistake was...
- Income Tax Officer Ward 2(1), Jamnagar vs Chandrashekhar Sharad Yagnik, JamnagarRajkot6 Feb 2026Dismissed
Also relies on Commissioner of Customs v. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.
The tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal because the tax effect was below the monetary limit of Rs. 60,00,000 prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 09/2024 dated 17.09.2024 for filing appeals before the ITAT. The tribunal e...
- Income Tax Officer, Morbi vs Neetaben Atulbhai Sherasiya, MorbiRajkot13 Oct 2025Dismissed
Also relies on Commissioner of Customs v. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.
The Tribunal noted that the tax effect was less than Rs. 60,00,000/-, which is the revised monetary limit for appeals as per CBDT Circular No. 09/2024. The Tribunal held that CBDT circulars are binding on the Revenue.
More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)
- Ajaybhai Dineshbhai Bagdai, Near Central… vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), New…ITA 74/RJT/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
- Shalin Jayantbhai Desai, Vadodara vs ACIT, Circle-4(2), Vadodara Present…ITA 2569/AHD/2026[2010-11]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2010-11
- Neo Structo Construction P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The Pr. CIT- 3, AhmedabadITA 1216/AHD/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Hetal Vinodchandra Sheth, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2370/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Hetal Vinodchandra Sheth, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2369/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sri Mohanraj vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Commercial TaxesKarnataka · 4 Nov 2026
- M/S Greenlam Industries LTD And Another vs. The UOI And OthersHimachal Pradesh · 3 Nov 2026
- M/S Sahoo Supply Agency,Balasore vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs,New DelhiOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- M/S Jyoti Consultants, Agrahat vs. Pr. Commissioner GST And Central Excise Commissionerate, BhubaneswarOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- M/S. Sahoo Supply Agency vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And CustomsOrissa · 3 Nov 2026