ITO, NEW DELHI vs. SHRI PARMINDER SINGH SABHARWAL, NEW DELHI
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 due to a low tax effect, as per CBDT Circular No. 21/2015. The circular mandates that appeals should not be filed if the tax effect is below Rs. 10,00,000.
What were the facts?
The Revenue filed an appeal before the ITAT against an order of the CIT(A). The appeal was filed for the assessment year 2009-10. The Revenue's appeal was based on a low tax effect.
What were the issues?
Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable before the Tribunal given the low tax effect as per CBDT Circular No. 21/2015.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
None explicitly mentioned as the decision was based on a circular.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘F’ : NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI J.S. REDDY & SHRI KULDIP SINGH
(PAN : AATPS4411J) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : None REVENUE BY : Shri F.R. Meena, Senior DR Date of Hearing : 27.07.2016 Date of Order : 27.07.2016 O R D E R
PER KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER :
The Appellant, Income-tax Officer, Ward 25 (2), New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘the revenue’) by filing the present appeal sought to set aside the impugned order dated 28.03.2013 passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-XXIV, New Delhi, qua the assessment year 2009-10.
Perusal of the aforesaid appeal filed by the Revenue apparently shows that the same is having low tax effect as per CBDT Circular No.21/2015 dated 10th December, 2015 vide which the Revenue has been directed not to prefer any appeal in case the tax effect is less than Rs.10,00,000/- and this factual position has been fairly conceded by the Ld. D.R. The Ld. A.R. contended that the appeal of the Revenue may be dismissed in the light of CBDT Circular (supra).
We have heard ld. Senior DR on the issue in controversy and perused the material on record. Perusal of CBDT Circular (supra) shows that monetary limit for filing the appeal by the Department before the Tribunal, Hon'ble High Court and Hon'ble Supreme Court has been revised and the relevant portion of the aforesaid circular is extracted as under:
"3. Henceforth, appeals/SLPs shall not be filed in cases where the tax effect does not exceed the monetary limits given hereunder: S.No. Appeals in Income-tax Monetary matters Limit (Rs.) 1 Before Appellate 10,00,000 Tribunal 2 Before High Court 20,00,000 3 Before Supreme Court 25,00,000 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.
This instruction will apply retrospectively to pending appeals and appeals to be filed henceforth in High Courts/ Tribunals. Pending appeals below the specified tax limits in para 3 above may be withdrawn / not pressed. Appeals before the Supreme Court will be governed by the instructions on this subject, operative at the time when such appeal was filed."
The contention of Ld. Sr. D.R. that he needs some time to procure the report from the Assessing Officer to work out the tax effect, is not tenable because when apparently, the appeal in question is covered under CBDT Circular No.21/2015 dated 10th December, 2015 (supra), the Revenue cannot import the facts within the knowledge of the Assessing Officer to further prolong the matter. However, in case any fact which is otherwise not on record, warrants the restoration of the present appeal, the revenue is at liberty to approach the Tribunal under relevant provisions of law.
In view of the CBDT Circular No.21 dated 10.12.2015 having retrospective effect and what has been discussed above, we are of the considered view that the aforesaid appeal is not maintainable because of low tax effect i.e. less than Rs.10,00,000/- hence, the aforesaid appeal filed by the Revenue is hereby dismissed having been become infructuous.
Order pronounced in open court on this 27th day of July, 2016.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Vinishma Technologies Private Limited vs. State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026
- J.M.Swamy vs. Government Of INDIAKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026
- S. Nithyananda vs. State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026
- Acc LTD. vs. Secy.Industries Deptt.Orissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Kumaran Transports (Tuticorin) Private Limited vs. The Assistant Commissioner Madras · 16 Oct 2026