The High Court disposed of the Income Tax Reference No. 50 of 2002 without answering the questions raised. This decision was taken because the tax effect involved was below the statutory threshold, and the Revenue counsel did not press the questions.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
975.ITR-50.02.doc
Sbw
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX REFERENCE NO.50 OF 2002
Commissioner of Income Tax ..Applicant Versus M/s.New Era Talkies ..Respondent
Mr. P. C. Chhotaray for the Applicant.
CORAM: M. S. SANKLECHA & A. K. MENON, JJ.
DATE : 19th AUGUST, 2016
P.C.:
This Reference relates to A.Y. 1993-94.
August, 2016 wherein she states that the tax effect involved in the present Reference is Rs.23,000/-. In view of the above, Mr. Chhotaray states that the tax effect being less than the threshold limit of 20 lakhs as provided in the CBDT Circular No.21 of 2015 dated 10th December, 2015 and as clarified by Instruction dated 8th March, 2016 the above Circular is applicable even to Reference, he does not press the questions raised herein.
975.ITR-50.02.doc
wadhwa
Commissioner of Income Tax
M/s. New Era Talkies
M. S. Sanklecha
A. K. Menon
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
