The Commissioner of lncome Tax - IV, Hyderabad v. M/s. Pokarna Limited

Counsel for the Appellant: Ms. B. SAPNA REDDY, JUNTOR S.C. REp. FOR SRI J.V. PRASAD, SENIOR S.C. INCOME TAX DEPT. Counsel for the Respondent: SRI CH. PUSHYAM KIRAN The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT I r I I I I THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE P.SAM KOSIIY AND THE HONOT]RABLE SRIJUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA ITTA No.251 OF 2012 JUDGMENI' (per Hon'ble Sri Justice P.Sam Koshy) I{eard Ms. B.Sapna Reddy, leamed Junior Standing Counsel representing Mr. J.V.Prasad, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department for the appellant. Perused the record.

This appeal under Section 260,{ of the Income Tax Act, 1961, has been preferred by the Revenue as the appellant against the order dated 26.09.2008 passed by the lncome Tax Appeltate Tlibunal, Hyderabad Bench 'A', Hyderabad, I.T.A.No.70lltIYD/2008 for the Assessment Year 2001-02.

Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) has issued Circular { I No.9 of 2024 dated 17.09.2024, amending the previous. Circular No.5 of 2024 dated 15.03.2024, by further enhancing the monetary limits for filing appeals by the Income Tax Department before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunals, High Courts and Supreme Court .\ 1 I I 2 as a measure for reducing litigation. In paragraph 2 of the said Circular, we find that the monetary limit fixed for filing an appeal before the High Court is Rs.2.00 crore. In the instant appeal, tax effect is well below the monetary

limit.

Therefore, the appeal filed by the Department is dismissed in terms of the aforesaid Circular No.9 of 2024 dated 17.09.2024. However, if the appeal comes within the exception of Circular No.5 of 2024, it would be open to the Income Tax Department to seek revival of the appeal. There shall be no order as to costs.

Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shalt stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/.K.SRINIVASA RAO JOINT REGISTRAR ECTION OFFICER

The lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal Hyderabad Bench 'A', Hyderabad 2. The Commissionei of lncome Tax (Appeals)-V, Hyderabad 3. The Deputy Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Circle-'16(3), Hyderabad' 4. One CC to'Sri J.V. Prasad, S.C. for lncome Tax [OPUC] 5. One CC to Sri Ch. Pushyam Kiran, Advocate IOPUCI 6. Two CD Copies Plp/PSL W I To, -. HIGH COURT DATED: 18t)2t2O2s JUDGMENT lTTA.No.251 of 2012 \ (' 1e ApB zoz5 i \s|:!:\:))y' -1'; DISMISSING THE APPEAL @ v