ITO, FARIDABAD V. NAINI EXPORTS PVT. LTD., FARIDABAD

MA 265/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves the Income-tax Officer Ward-2(1), Faridabad as the appellant and Naini Exports Pvt. Ltd. as the respondent. The Revenue filed a miscellaneous application to recall the Tribunal's order dated 09-01-2025, which dismissed their appeal based on the tax effect being below the prescribed monetary limit of Rs. 60,00,000. The Revenue contended that the case involved organized tax evasion and accommodation entries, which are exceptions to the monetary limit as per CBDT Circular No. 5/2024. The respondent opposed the application, arguing that the Revenue sought to review the Tribunal's order, which is not permissible under law. The Tribunal found that the case indeed falls within the exceptions of the circular and allowed the application, restoring the main appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 833859 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 04-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 26-07-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRAVEEN DAS CHOWDHAURY
• Assessee Lawyers: JITENDER WADHWA
• Keywords: Tax effect; Accommodation entries; Penny stocks; Bogus

Judgement Text

" 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘Friday-E’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A.No. 265/Del/2025 IN ITA no. 4173/Del/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Income-tax Officer Ward-2(1), Faridabad Vs Naini Exports Pvt. Ltd. Plot No. 43,Sector -27A Faridabad Haryana Pan NO. AADCN8123D (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by Sh. Praveen Das Chowdhaury, Sr. DR Respondent by Sh. Jitender Wadhwa,CA Date of hearing: 30/01/2026 Date of Pronouncement: 4/02/2026 ORDER PER SUDHIR KUMAR, JM: This miscellaneous application has moved by the Revenue to recall the order of this Tribunal dated 09-01-2025 in ITA No. 4173/Del/2024 pertaining to A.Y. 2012-13. 2. The contention of the Revenue is that the appeal was decided, on ground of tax effect involved in the case which is below the prescribed monetary limit of RS. 60,00,000/-, ignoring the facts of the case that this case lies in the exception defined in Circular No. 5/2024 dated 15-03-2024 at point No. Printed from counselvise.com 2 3.1 where, it says Case involving organized tax evasion including cases of bogus capital gain/loss through penny stocks and cases of accommodation entries and the instance case issue of accommodation entries is involved. This is apparent mistake of fact which can be rectified u/s 254(2) of the Income Tax Act 1961. He also stated that the Tribunal also grant the liberty to move the restoration application if it is found that the CBDT circular is not applicable in any manner. 3. The Ld. AR of the assessee strongly objected the application and submitted that under Section 254(2) of the Act, the apparent mistake of the fact may be rectified, but in this case the Revenue wants to review the order of the Tribunal which is not permissible as per law. 4. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. In the order dated 09-01-2015 the tribunal observed as under: “3. At the time of hearing, no one attended the proceedings on behalf of the assessee. It was submitted that the appeal filed by the Revenue is hit by recently issued CBDT circular No.09 of 2024 dated 17-09-2024 revising the previous thresholds pertaining to tax effects. As per aforesaid Circular all pending appeals filed by revenue are liable to be dismissed as a measure for reducing litigation where the tax effect does not exceeds the prescribed monetary limit which Printed from counselvise.com 3 is now revised at RS.60 Lakhs. In the instant case, the tax effect on the disputed issues raised by the Revenue is stated to be not exceeding RS.60 lakhs and therefore, appeal of the Revenue is required to be dismissed in limine. 4. The Ld. Sr. DR for the Revenue fairly admitted the applicability of the CBDT circular No. 09 of 2024 dated 17- 09-2024. Accordingly. Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as not maintainable. However, it will be open to the Revenue to seek restoration of its appeal on showing inapplicability of the aforesaid CBDT Circular in any manner. 5. In the result , the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.” 5. We have given a thoughtful consideration to the contents of the miscellaneous application and the submissions of the parties. We find that the CBDT Circular No.9 of 2024 dated 17-09-2024 is not applicable on the case in hand because the case falls in the exceptions in the circular no 5/2024 dated 15-03-2024 at point no. (h) of para No. 3.1. This is apparent mistake of facts which can be rectified under section 254(2) of the Income–tax Act, 1961. Therefore, the miscellaneous application filed by the Revenue is liable allowed. We hold and direct accordingly. The main appeal is restored on its original number. Registry is directed to fix the appeal for hearing before the appropriate bench. Printed from counselvise.com 4 6. In the result, the miscellaneous application filed by the Revenue is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 4.02.2026 Sd/- Sd/- (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) (SUDHIR KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER SR BHATANGGAR Date:- 4.02.2026 Copy forwarded to: 1.Appellant 2.Respondent 3.CIT 4.CIT(Appeals) 5.DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI Printed from counselvise.com "