Dismissed

The Director of Income Tax (International Taxation) -I Mumbai v. Daimler Chryster A.G.

Bombay HC4 Aug 2016ITXA/1700/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Bombay High Court examined the applicability of Circular No.21 of 2015 regarding monetary limits for filing appeals in Income Tax matters. Since the tax effect was within the specified limit, the appellant did not press the appeal, and the court dismissed it accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Income Tax Appeal No.1700 of 2011 dismissed as not pressed; Court Fees refunded.

The Director of Income Tax (International… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2016)

911.ITXA-1700.11.doc

Sbw

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶5

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶6

INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1700 OF 2011

¶7

Director of Income Tax

¶8

(International Taxation)-I

¶9

..Appellant

¶10

Versus

¶11

M/s. Daimler Chryster A.G. ..Respondent

¶12

Mr. Suresh Kumar a/w Ms. Samiksha Kanani for the appellant. Mr. Ansh Desai i/b. PDS Legal for the respondent.

¶13

CORAM: M. S. SANKLECHA & A. K. MENON, JJ.

¶14

DATE : 4^th AUGUST, 2016

¶15

P.C.:

¶16

This Appeal relates to Assessment Year 2003-04.

¶17

Mr. Suresh Kumar, learned Counsel appearing for the Revenue

¶18

invited our attention to Circular No.21 of 2015 issued by the Central Board for Direct Tax dated 10^th December, 2015. In particular, our

¶19

attention is invited to paragraphs 3 and 10 therein which read as under:-

¶20

“3:- Henceforth, appeals/SLPs shall not be filed in cases where the tax effect does not exceed the monetary limits given hereunder:-

¶21

2 911.ITXA-1700.11.doc

¶22

S. No.	Appeals in Income Tax matters	Monetary Limit (in Rs.)
1	Before Appellate Tribunal	10,00,000/-
2	Before High Court	20,00,000/-
3	Before Supreme Court	25,00,000/-

¶23

It is clarified that an appeal should not be filed merely because the tax effect in a case exceeds the monetary limits prescribed above. Filing of appeal in such cases is to be decided on merits of the case.”

¶24

“10:- This instruction will apply retrospectively to pending appeals and appeals to be filed henceforth in High Courts/ Tribunals. Pending appeals below the specified tax limits in para 3 above may be withdrawn/not pressed. Appeals before the Supreme Court will be governed by the instructions on this subject, operative at the time when such appeal was filed.”

¶25

In the present case, the tax effect is Rs.14.75 lakhs as mentioned in paragraph 10 of the Appeal Memo.

¶26

In view of the above, Mr. Suresh Kumar, learned Counsel appearing for the Revenue does not press the present Appeal.

¶27

Accordingly, Appeal is dismissed, as not pressed.

¶28

Refund of Court Fees, as per Rules.

¶29

(A. K. MENON, J.) (M. S. SANKLECHA, J.)

¶30

wadhwa

The Director of Income Tax (International Taxation) -I Mumbai v. Daimler Chryster A.G.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Director of Income Tax (International Taxation) -I Mumbai v. Daimler Chryster A.G.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Commissioner of Income TAX-19 Vs Mr. Rajesh Keshav Pillai

Commissioner of Income Tax,Central III Vs Shri Premji T. Shah

The Commissioner of Income Tax- 19 Mumbai Vs Vipinchadra M. Jain HUF

Commissioner of Income Tax Central Pune Vs Bharat Udyog Ltd.

Caprihans India Ltd. Vs Jitendra Yadav and Anr.

Ramesh Chandra Moona Vs the Office of the Appropriate Authority