ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT · SOURCE-REVIEWED PROCEDURAL ORDER
Commissioner of Income Tax v. M/s Obeteee P Ltd., Mirzapur
Income Tax Appeal No. 68 of 2013 ·
Supplied court order; no reported citation stated
Revenue appeal dismissed for admitted low tax effect; underlying tax merits were not decided.
Division Bench · Naheed Ara Moonis · Saumitra Dayal Singh
1. Facts of the case
The Revenue appeal under section 260(A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 arose from the Tribunal, Allahabad, order dated 23 November 2012 in ITA 249/Alld/2011, AY 2005-06. Revenue’s counsel stated that the disputed tax was below the prescribed monetary limit set by the CBDT. The source states no circular number or numerical threshold.
2. Discussion by the Hon’ble Court
The Hon’ble Court recorded that the above position was admitted to the parties and disposed of the appeal on that basis. It did not examine the underlying assessment grounds.
3. Judicial decision
The appeal was dismissed because the disputed tax was below the stated threshold limit.
4. Outcome / in whose favour
In favour of the assessee only as to termination of the Revenue appeal on monetary-limit grounds. The Court did not determine the underlying tax merits, recompute tax or decide an exception to a monetary-limit instruction.
5. AKHB REVIEW POINT
Report this as a source-specific historical procedural result. Do not import a circular number or rupee threshold from another order. Read this disposal against its own High Court docket, Tribunal appeal and assessment year. Similar party names and dates do not extend the result to another appeal or establish the correctness of an underlying assessment.
Source and verification
Complete supplied one-page original read, independently SHA-256 verified, complete text matched the existing source review, and visually inspected. The stated assessment year is recorded; no PAN is stated. Later treatment and current law are not cleared.
Source SHA-256: af7fc23cbb68a2f3b3d12fde199248a0364f673ee1947d4eaf9dc37dfefb33e7
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.