ASST CIT CIR 3, MUMBAI vs. PRAVIN M SOLANKI, THANE
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 noted that the tax effect was below the threshold specified in CBDT Circular No. 21/2015, and the issue was not an exception. Therefore, the Revenue was precluded from pursuing the appeal.
What were the facts?
The Revenue filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) for Assessment Year 2010-11. The assessee did not appear for the hearing. The Departmental Representative conceded that the tax effect was less than Rs. 10 lakhs.
What were the issues?
Whether the Revenue's appeal should be dismissed due to low tax effect as per CBDT circulars.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “J” Bench, Mumbai
Before: Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Amit Shukla (JM)
O R D E R Per Amit Shukla (JM) :-
The appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 19.1.2015 passed by learned CIT(A)- 2, Thane and it relates to A.Y. 2010-11.
None appeared on behalf of the assessee. Learned DR fairly admitted that the tax effect involved in this appeal is less than ` 10 lakhs.
We have heard learned Departmental Representative and perused the record. We noticed that the tax effect involved in this appeal is less than ` 10 lakhs. Hence, the Revenue is precluded from pursuing this appeal as per the Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10.12.2015 issued by the CBDT. We also noticed that the issue contested in this appeal is not covered by the exception provided in para 8 of the Circular (supra).
In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed.
Order has been pronounced in the Court on 8.12.2016
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Ajay Kumar @ Ajay Sharma vs. Union Of INDIA Rep Thr The Intelligence Officer, Directorate General Of GST Intelligence (Dggi)Jharkhand · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Shila Traders vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Ashish Enterprises vs. Assistant Commissioner Gsto Ward No. 86Delhi · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Om.S.R. Construction, Through Its Proprietor Mr. Kuldeep Sharma vs. The State Of Jharkhand Through Its Commissioner, Commerical Tax DepartmentJharkhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Bhanwal Trading And Company vs. The Union Of INDIARajasthan · 28 Oct 2026