ITO, BULANDSHAHR vs. SHRI KAUSHAL CHANDRA AGARWAL, BULANDSHAHR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue, noting that it was covered by the CBDT circular regarding low tax effect. The dismissal was without prejudice to the Revenue's right to appeal in subsequent years with a higher tax effect.
What were the facts?
The Revenue filed an appeal before the ITAT. The CBDT issued an instruction revising the monetary limit for filing appeals to the Tribunal to Rs. 10 lakhs. The tax effect in the present appeal was below this limit.
What were the issues?
Whether a pending appeal with a tax effect below the revised monetary limit set by CBDT instruction should be dismissed. The applicability of CBDT instructions to pending 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: ‘D’: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, & SHRI L.P. SAHU,
PER CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER
This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order of the CIT(A), Meerut, dated 12/10/2012 for A.Y 2007- 08.
This appeal has 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 lakh 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instruction would apply retrospectively and the pending appeals below the specified tax limit of Rs.10 lakhs may be withdrawn/not pressed.
The learned CIT-DR appearing on behalf of the Revenue before us, at the outset, submitted that appeal can be withdrawn only after getting the approval of competent authority.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.
None appeared on behalf of the assessee. However, the appeal was heard ex parte as the CBDT circular is beneficial to them.
After considering the submissions of the ld. DR, we find that prima facie, the tax effect involved in this appeal by the Revenue is below Rs. 10.00 lakhs and, therefore, we deem it proper to dismiss the appeal 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 this appeal and will not be an estoppel for the Revenue to take up the issue, involved in this appeal, 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 case, we dismiss the instant appeal filed by the Revenue as tax effect in the appeal is less than Rs.10 lakhs.
In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed.
The order is pronounced in the open court on 27.01.2016.
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 →- Saraswati Phukan vs. The Union Of INDIA And 4 OrsGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- Sanjay Maheshwari vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 14 Oct 2026
- Sanjay Maheshwari vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 14 Oct 2026
- Iyyanan Eswaran vs. The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (St) (GST)Madras · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Dc Security Services vs. Commissioner Of Central Goods And Services TaxUttarakhand · 14 Oct 2026