Dismissed

The Commissioner of Income Tax-Iv, Pune v. Vidyanand Co.Op. Bank Ltd.

Bombay HC19 Jan 2016ITXA/547/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dismissed the Income Tax Appeal by the Commissioner of Income Tax-VI, Pune against Vidyanand Co-op. Bank Ltd. for Assessment Year 2003-04, as the counsel for the Revenue did not press the appeal citing Circular No.21 of 2015 regarding monetary limits.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed as not pressed; Refund of Court Fees ordered as per Rules.

The Commissioner of Income Tax-Iv, Pune Vs Vidyanand Co.Op. Bank… — Income Tax | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

547-08-itxa=.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶3

INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 547 OF 2008

¶4

The Commissioner of Income Tax-VI, Pune

¶5

.. Appellant

¶6

v/s.

¶7

Vidyanand Co-op. Bank Ltd.

¶8

..Respondent

¶9

Mr. Ashok Kotangale a/w Ms. Podma Diwakar for the appellant

¶10

CORAM : M.S. SANKLECHA & B.P. COLABAWALLA, J.J.

¶11

DATED : 19^th JANUARY, 2015.

¶12

P.C.

¶13

This Appeal relates to Assessment Year 2003-04.

¶14

Mr. Kotangale, learned Counsel appearing for the Revenue 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 attention invited to paragraphs 3 and 10 therein which read as under:-

¶15

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

1 of 2

Uday S. Jagtap

547-08-itxa=.doc

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/-

¶20

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.”

¶21

“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 Pending appeals below the specified tax limits in para 3 above may be withdrawn/not pressed.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.”

¶22

In the present case, the tax effect is Rs. 4.09 lakhs as mentioned in paragraph 10 of the Appeal Memo.

¶23

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

¶24

Accordingly, Appeal is dismissed, as not pressed.

¶25

Refund of Court Fees, as per Rules.

¶26

(B.P. COLABAWALLA, J.)

¶27

(M.S. SANKLECHA, J.)

¶28

2 of 2

¶29

Uday S. Jagtap

The Commissioner of Income Tax-Iv, Pune v. Vidyanand Co.Op. Bank Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Commissioner of Income Tax-Iv, Pune v. Vidyanand Co.Op. Bank Ltd.

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

Nirmal Bank Securities Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 41, Mumbai and 2 Ors.

Mahesh v Mirani Vs the Asst.Commissioner of Income TAX-19(2) and Anr.

The Commissionr of INCOME-TAX-19 Vs Neeta J. Arora

Director of Income Tax (International Taxation), Mumbai Vs Argoma N.V.

The Commissioner of Income Tax - Vi, Mumbai Vs M/S Bcc Synthetics Ltd.

The Commissioner of INCOME-TAX-11,MUM Vs Dr Amin Pathology Laboratory