ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT · SOURCE-REVIEWED PROCEDURAL ORDER
Commissioner of Income Tax, Kanpur v. M/s Bodega Alcobev, Kanpur
Income Tax Appeal No. 7 of 2015 ·
Supplied court order; no reported citation stated
Revenue appeal dismissed for tax effect below the monetary limit, as recorded in this order.
Division Bench · Bharati Sapru · Neeraj Tiwari
1. Facts of the case
Revenue had brought an income-tax appeal. Counsel for the respondent pointed out that the tax effect involved was below Rs 20,00,000. The order does not identify an assessment year or the underlying assessment issue.
2. Discussion by the Hon’ble Court
The Court referred to Circular No.21/2015, F.No.279/MISC.142/2007-ITJ (PT.), dated 10 December 2015, and recorded a Rs 20,00,000 monetary limit for High Court appeals. This note reports the Court’s stated basis; it does not independently certify the circular’s scope or later amendments.
3. Judicial decision
The appeal was dismissed as being below the monetary limit.
4. Outcome / in whose favour
The Revenue appeal ended by dismissal on the stated monetary-limit ground. The Court did not decide the underlying tax merits.
5. AKHB REVIEW POINT
Treat this as a case-specific procedural disposal. Do not infer that the respondent succeeded on any substantive provision or that the amount recorded here remains the current filing threshold. Check the actual applicable circular and exceptions before using a monetary-limit proposition in another matter.
Source and verification
Complete supplied one-page order read and visually inspected. Original SHA-256 independently reverified; full source text matched the supplied merged-page record. No assessment year or PAN is stated. No later proceedings or current-law clearance is represented.
Source SHA-256: b10cb1558044a726461aacf02f6f6e953a630ef74342cfacbf27b4e3311d4802
Only provisions expressly identified in this order are recorded. No substantive tax merits or current statutory equivalence is inferred.
Source checked 2026-10-18. Later proceedings, compliance and current precedential treatment have not been comprehensively verified.
AI disclosure and professional disclaimer
This AKHB research note was prepared with AI assistance from an identified primary report. Independent human review is not represented.
General legal and tax research only; not legal or tax advice. Verify the complete judgment, applicable statutory version and subsequent treatment before reliance. The AKHB REVIEW POINT is editorial analysis, not the Court’s holding. No current-law clearance is claimed.