What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. However, it dismissed the appeal as the appellant failed to clearly specify which exceptional clause applied and the tax effect was below the threshold.

The appellant, Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, sought to appeal an order but faced a delay of 72 days in filing. The tax effect was below the prescribed limit but the appellant claimed it fell under an exceptional category.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be entertained despite the tax effect being below the prescribed limit and the appellant failing to clearly establish an exceptional clause.

PCIT vs Rameswarpur Cold Storage Pvt Ltd | Calcutta High Court 2026

OD 4 ORDER SHEET ITAT/35/2026 IA NO: GA/1/2026, GA/2/2026 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX) ORIGINAL SIDE

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 KOLKATA VS RAMESWARPUR COLD STORAGE PVT LTD

BEFORE: The Hon’ble JUSTICE RAJARSHI BHARADWAJ AND The Hon’ble JUSTICE UDAY KUMAR Date: 25th March, 2026.

Appearance: Mr. Prabir Kumar Bhowmik, Adv. Mr. Sujit Mitra, Adv. . . .for the appellant.

Ms. Swapna Das, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Das, Adv. . . .for the respondent.

The Court: Heard learned counsel appearing for either of the parties. There is a delay of 72 days in filing the appeal. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/assessee vehemently opposes such submission made by the appellant. We are satisfied with the explanation offered for not preferring the appeal within time. Therefore, the delay is condoned. The application being GA/1/2026 is allowed.

2 Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the tax effect in this case is Rs.1,10,89,611/- which is below the tax limit as prescribed in the CBDT Circular No.9/2024 dated 17th September, 2024 and Circular No.5 of 2024 dated 15th March, 2024 but the case falls within the exceptional category under para 3.1(h) as per CBDT Circular No.5 of 2024 dated 15th March, 2024. We have perused the application, the assessment order, appellate order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax and the order of the learned Tribunal. We do not find any reason to entertain this appeal where the appellant has not clearly suggested which exceptional clause as read in para 3.1(h) as per CBDT Circular No.5 of 2024 dated 15th March, 2024 is applicable in the present appeal. As such, this appeal and the connected application being GA/2/2026 are dismissed as the tax effect in this matter is below Rs. 2 crores.

(RAJARSHI BHARADWAJ, J.)

(UDAY KUMAR, J.)

Sp/

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 KOLKATA vs. RAMESWARPUR COLD STORAGE PVT LTD

What did the High Court hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments