Dismissed¶33

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central ), Hyd. v. Oil Country Tubular Ltd., Hyd.

Telangana HC20 Aug 2025ITTA/51/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CBDT Circular No.9 of 2024 monetary limit Rs.2.00 crore for High Court appeals; Revenue appeal dismissed for tax effect below monetary limit; revival liberty under exceptions of Circular No.5 of 2024; ITTA No. 51 of 2011, Telangana High Court, decided 20-08-2025; AY 1999-2000; Oil Country Tubular Ltd.; challenge to ITAT Hyderabad Bench 'B' order dated 11-01-2008 in I.T.A.No.13/Hyd/2006; dismissal without costs; miscellaneous petitions closed.

What did the court decide?

None; the Revenue's appeal stands dismissed without costs, with liberty reserved to the Income Tax Department to seek revival if the appeal falls within the exceptions of Circular No.5 of 2024. ¶33

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central ), Hyd. Vs Oil Country… — Income Tax | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None; the Revenue's appeal stands dismissed without costs, with liberty reserved to the Income Tax Department to seek revival if the appeal falls within the exceptions of Circular No.5 of 2024.

¶33

Issue for consideration

Whether the tax effect involved in the appeal is below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No.9 of 2024 for filing appeals by the Income Tax Department before the High Court, warranting dismissal in terms of the Circular.

¶32

Court's answer

Since the tax effect in the appeal is well below the Rs.2.00 crore monetary limit fixed by CBDT Circular No.9 of 2024 for Departmental appeals before the High Court, the appeal filed by the Department is dismissed in terms of that Circular.

¶33

Ratio / Principle

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.

¶33

Key takeaways

There shall be no order as to costs.ratio¶33
Consequential direction: miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.ratio¶34

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad, ITTA No. 51 of 2011, decided 20-08-2025 (coram: Justices P. Sam Koshy and Suddala Chalapathi Rao; judgment per P. Sam Koshy). The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Hyderabad (Revenue), appealed against the order dated 11-01-2008 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench 'B', in I.T.A.No.13/Hyd/2006 for Assessment Year 1999-2000 concerning Oil Country Tubular Ltd. Relying on CBDT Circular No.9 of 2024 dated 17.09.2024 (which amended Circular No.5 of 2024 dated 15.03.2024 and fixed the monetary limit for Departmental appeals before the High Court at Rs.2.00 crore), and observing that the tax effect in the appeal was well below that limit, the Court dismissed the appeal in terms of the Circular, made no order as to costs, reserved liberty to the Department to seek revival if the appeal came within the exceptions of Circular No.5 of 2024, and directed that pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, stand closed.

¶1

¶2

[^348s ]

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO

¶8

INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL NO: 51 OF 2011

¶9

' lncome Tax Tribunal Appeal Under Section 2604 of the lncome Tax Act,1961 against the Order dated 11-01-2008^passed in ITA No.13/Hyd/2006 for the Assessment Year 1999-2000 on the file of the lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench'B', Hyderabad.

¶10

Between:

¶11

The Commissioner of lncome Tax (Central ), Hyderabad

¶12

...Appellant

¶13

AND

¶14

Oil Country Tubular Ltd.,^'108, Kanchanjunga, King Koti Road, Hyderabad

¶15

...ReSpondent

¶16

Counsel for the Appellant: Ms. B.SAPNA REDDY, (SR SC FOR INCOM TAX)

¶17

Counsel for the Respondents: Ms. K.PRABHABATI, REPRESENTING SRI K VASANT KUMAR

¶18

The Court made the following: JUDGMENT

¶19

¶20

-ry.

¶21

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND .fHE TIONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO

¶22

ITTA No.5l OF 201r

¶23

JUDGMENI:^(per Hon'ble Sri Justice P.Som Koshy)

¶24

Heard Ms. B.Sapna Reddy, leamed Senior Standing

¶25

Counsel for the Income Tax Department for the appellant and Ms. K.Prabhabati, learned counsel representing Mr. K.Vasant

¶26

Kumar, learned counsel for the res[,ondent. Perused the record

¶27

This rlppeal r.rnder Section 260,4. of the Income Tax Act, 1961, has been preferred by the Revenue as 1he appellant against the order dated 11.01.2008 passed by the lncome Tax 1n Appellate^'Iribunal, Hyderabad Bench 'B', Hvderabad, I.T.A.No.13/Hyd/2006 for the Assessment Year 1999-2000.

¶28

Central Board of Direct Taxes^(CBDT) has issued Circular No.9 of 2024 dated 17.09.2024, amending the previous Circular No.5 of 2024 dated 15.03.2024, by fi.rrther enhancing the monetary limits for filing appeals by the Income Tax Deparlmcnt before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunals, High Courts and Supreme Court

¶29

l,I

¶30

¶31

as a measure for reducing litigation. In paragraph 2 of the said Circular, we find that the monetary limit fixed for filing an appeal belore the High Court is Rs.2.00 crorc.

¶32

4 In the instant appeal, tax effect is well below the monetarv limit.

¶33

Therefore, the appeal filed by the Deparlment is dismissed in terms of the aforesaid Circular No.9 of 2024 d,ated, 11 .09.2024. However, if the appeal comes within the exception of Circular No.5 of 2024, it would be open to the lncome Tax Depaftment to seek revival of the appeal. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶34

Consequently, rniscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall

¶35

stand closed.

¶36

SD/- N. SRIHARI UTY REGISTRAR /ITRUE COPY// CTION OFFICER

¶37

To, 1. The lncome^{Tax Appellate Tribunal, HyderabadBench'B" Hyderabad' .} ^- 2. One CC^{to Ms. B.Sapna Reddy (SR Sb for lncome Tax)' AdvocateIOPUC]} 5. On" CC to^{Sri K Vasant Kumar, Advocate [OPUC]}

¶38