ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT · SOURCE-REVIEWED PROCEDURAL ORDER
Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Meerut v. M/s Girnar Textiles
Income Tax Appeal No. 303 of 2017 ·
Supplied court order; no reported citation stated
Revenue section 260A appeal dismissed on the historical monetary-limit ground; section 263 question not decided.
Division Bench · Bharati Sapru · Piyush Agrawal (author)
1. Facts of the case
Revenue appealed the Delhi Tribunal’s order dated 23 March 2017 in ITA 4334/Del/2015 for AY 2008–09. The admitted question concerned deletion of a consequential section 143(3)/263 assessment after the section 263 revision had been set aside, while Revenue’s appeal against that earlier Tribunal decision was pending. The assessee raised a preliminary monetary-limit objection.
2. Discussion by the Hon’ble Court
The Court addressed maintainability under CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11 July 2018. It recorded that Revenue challenged deletion of Rs. 41,12,950 and treated the amount as below the circular’s monetary limit. It did not answer the admitted section 263 question or analyse the legal effect of the pending appeal.
3. Judicial decision
Income Tax Appeal No. 303 of 2017 was dismissed as not maintainable on the monetary-limit ground.
4. Outcome / in whose favour
The assessee obtained procedural dismissal of Revenue’s appeal. The Court did not decide that every consequential assessment must fall whenever a revision order is set aside, or adjudicate the underlying addition.
5. AKHB REVIEW POINT
The order describes Rs. 41,12,950 as the deleted amount; it does not provide a tax-effect computation. Do not relabel that amount as independently verified tax effect. Distinguish the admitted question from the ground actually decided, and check the applicable circular, exceptions and later proceedings separately. No current monetary threshold is represented.
Source and verification
Complete supplied two-page order read and visually inspected. Exact original SHA-256 and complete text match the source review packet. Assessment year 2008–09 is stated; PAN is not stated. Later proceedings and current law have not been cleared.
Source SHA-256: 66b92562aacfd66ba73df562a18c8777c1fdce54a1a3c8765c92f9cea5006db6
Only provisions expressly identified in this order are recorded. No substantive tax merits or current statutory equivalence is inferred.
Source checked 2026-10-19. 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.