ACIT, MEERUT vs. SHRI SURJEET SINGH GOLDY, MEERUT
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 found that the appeal's tax effect was below the threshold specified in CBDT Circular No. 21/2015, which has statutory force. Therefore, the appeal was not maintainable.
What were the facts?
The Revenue appealed an order that deleted an addition of Rs. 28,01,000. The assessee's representative raised a preliminary objection regarding the appeal's maintainability due to a tax effect below Rs. 10 lacs, violating CBDT Circular No. 21/2015.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was the maintainability of the Revenue's appeal due to its tax effect being below the limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 21/2015.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “Meerut Camp at MEERUT
Before: SHRI I.C. SUDHIR & SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI
ORDER
PER I.C. SUDHIR: JUDICIAL MEMBER The Revenue has questioned first appellate order whereby the Learned CIT(Appeals) has deleted the addition of Rs.28,01,000 made by the Assessing Officer. At the outset of hearing, the Learned AR raised a preliminary objection about the maintainability of the very appeal having tax effect below Rs.10 lacs and is thus has been preferred in violation of CBDT Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10.12.2015. The Learned AR also referred copy of the notice of the demand under sec. 156 dated 22.12.2009 issued by the department showing the due tax at Rs.8,06,909. He submitted further that the appeal is otherwise not maintainable since as per the direction of the ITAT vide order dated 25.4.2011, the Learned CIT(Appeals) had to decide the 2 appeal on the legal issue regarding the validity of assessment proceedings under sec. 147 read with sec. 143(3) of the Act in absence of issuance of notice under sec. 143(2) of the Act which issue raised vide ground No.1 before the Learned CIT(Appeals) was not adjudicated upon by him while disposing the first appellate order in the first round.
More judgments on Section 268A
- Income Tax Officer, Ajmer vs Hemant Kumar Sharma, AjmerITA 1506/JPR/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Income Tax Officer, Indore vs Aashta Doshi, IndoreITA 789/IND/2025[2024-25]Status: Disposed12 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Income Tax Officer Ward -1(2)(3), Ahmedabad vs Khushal Madhavlal Darji, AhmedabadITA 82/AHD/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed25 Sept 2026AY 2022-23
- Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Mehsana vs Hemantkumar Faljibhai Chaudhary, MehsanaITA 475/AHD/2025[2012-13]Status: Disposed25 Sept 2026AY 2012-13
- Dy. CIT-4(1), Indore vs Kiran Bajpai, IndoreITA 426/IND/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed9 Sept 2026AY 2024-25
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Ut Corp vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 26 Oct 2026
- Sunrise Engineering vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Kalra Traders vs. Union Of INDIAUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Ms Isoft vs. The Commissioner State TaxUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Sita Enterprises vs. Office Of The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026