ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SH. SALIL KAPUR, 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 decided to dismiss the appeals filed by the Revenue. This decision was based on the CBDT instruction that no departmental appeal should be filed if the tax effect is less than Rs. 10 lakhs.
What were the facts?
The Revenue filed several appeals before the ITAT. The appeals were heard together as they involved similar issues and were subject to a recent CBDT instruction revising the monetary limit for filing appeals.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was whether the appeals filed by the Revenue should be dismissed due to a low tax effect, as per the CBDT's revised monetary limit for appeals.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘G’: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL & SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG
Heard together (4 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
these are being disposed off by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience.
These appeals have been fixed for hearing in view of the recent CBDT Instruction No. 21/2015 dated 10.12.2015, revising the monetary limit of Rs.10.00 lakhs for not filing the appeal before the Tribunal in terms of section 268A(1) of the Income-tax Act.
The CBDT in its recent Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10.12.2015 has provided that no departmental appeal shall be filed before the 1TAT wherein the tax effect involved is less than Rs.10 lakhs. Further, in para 10 of the Circular, it is provided that this instruction would apply retrospectively and the pending appeals below the specified tax limit of Rs.10 lakhs may be withdrawn/not pressed.
The learned CIT-DR appearing on behalf of the Revenue before us, at the outset, submitted that appeals can be withdrawn only after getting the approval of competent authority. He further referred to para 7 of the circular to submit that dismissal of appeal, however, in any case, on account of low tax effect should not be considered as a precedence in the matters of subsequent years where the tax effect is above the monetary limit prescribed by this Circular and the issue should be decided on merits.
The learned counsels for the assessee appearing in a couple of cases, on the other hand, stated that the Circular was squarely applicable to the present appeals of the Revenue while in three other cases, none appeared for and on behalf of the assessee. However, the appeals were heard ex parte as the CBDT circular is beneficial to them.
After considering the submissions of both the parties, we find that prima facie, the tax effect involved in these appeals by the Revenue is below Rs. 10.00 lakhs and, therefore, we deem it proper to dismiss the appeals particularly because the pending appeal is covered by circular in view of para 10 of the circular. However, we may clarify that if on receipt of this order, the Assessing Officer finds that the tax effect is above Rs.10 lakhs or in any other manner, the Circular is not applicable in view of exceptions culled out in the Circular, he will be at liberty to file miscellaneous application for recalling of this order which the Tribunal will consider in accordance with law. We further find considerable force in the contention of the CIT/DR that this order cannot be considered as an acceptance by the Revenue on the issue involved in these appeals and will not be an estoppel for the Revenue to take up the issues, involved in these appeals, before ITAT on merits if the tax effect in those years is more than Rs.10 lakhs.
Keeping in view the above Circular and the provisions of section 268A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and without going into merits of the cases, we dismiss the instant appeals filed by the Revenue as tax effect in all the appeals is less than Rs.10 lakhs.
In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue stand dismissed.
The order is pronounced in the open court on 05.02.2016.
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 →- Ritu Gautam Proprietor Of Ms Heritage International vs. Additional Commissioner Central Goods And Services Tax Appeals Ii Delhi & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Sutha vs. The State Tax Officer(Inspection-3)Madras · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sri Satya Sai Constructions vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- Anisha Busa vs. Sibar Institute Of Dental SciencesAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sri Satya Sai Constructions vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026