THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GUNTUR vs. M/S.KRISHNAVENI ENTERPRISES (P) LIMITED

PDF · subscribers
ITTA/442/2006HC Andhra PradeshAPHC01015743200631 March 2026Bench: LISA GILL,NINALA JAYASURYA3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn based on the CBDT Circular No. 9 of 2024, which specified a monetary limit for appeals. The court, however, kept the question of law involved open for adjudication in appropriate future proceedings.

What were the facts?

The Commissioner of Income Tax filed an appeal against an ITAT order. The appellant's counsel sought to withdraw the appeal, citing a CBDT circular that set a monetary limit for appeals, as the tax effect was under Rs. 2 Crores.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal should be withdrawn due to the tax effect falling below the CBDT's monetary limit, and whether the question of law should be kept open despite such withdrawal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

APHC010157432006

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL NO: 442 of 2006 Bench Sr.No:- 41 [3575]

The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Guntur ...Appellant Vs. M/s Krishnaveni Enterprises (P) limited ...Respondent

CORAM : MRS JUSTICE LISA GILL MR JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA DATE : 1st April 2026 Present: Mr.Y.N.Vivekananda, Senior Advocate for appellant. *** LISA GILL, J.

Present appeal has been filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, challenging order dated 10.08.2005 passed by learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench-A, Hyderabad, in ITA No.984/Hyd/2002. 2. Learned counsel for appellant at the outset submits that tax effect involved in present appeal is under Rs.2 Crores, therefore, as per Circular No.9 of 2024, dated 17.09.2024 issued by Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, CBDT, Government of India, he has instructions to withdraw this

appeal. However, question of law as involved may be kept open for adjudication. 3. Appeal is, accordingly, dismissed as withdrawn with question of law, if any involved being kept open for adjudication in appropriate proceedings. 4. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of.

(LISA GILL) JUDGE

(NINALA JAYASURYA) JUDGE

Date: 01.04.2026 KA

MRS JUSTICE LISA GILL

MR JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL NO: 442 of 2006

Date: 01.04.2026 KA

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →