The High Court disposed of the appeal as not pressed, relying on a Ministry of Finance circular that sets a monetary limit for pursuing tax effect matters before the High Court.
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.
$~27
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI-3
..... Petitioner
Through: Ms. Vibhooti Malhitra and Mr. Shailendera Singh, Advocates. versus
ANITA RANI MAHAJAN ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Salil Kapoor and Mr. Shivansh Pandya, Advocates.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA O R D E R
% 05.02.2020
In the light of the Circular No. 5/2019 dated 05.02.2019 issued by the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Direct Taxes (Judicial Section), Government of India, which fixes the monetary limit in respect of tax effect, inert alia, before the High Court in which the Department could pursue the matter as Rs. 1,00,00,000/- and in view of the fact that the tax effect in the present case is Rs. 3,82,576/-, the present appeal is disposed of as not pressed.
VIPIN SANGHI, J
SANJEEV NARULA, J
FEBRUARY 05, 2020 nk
1 provisions across 1 enactments
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI-3
ANITA RANI MAHAJAN
VIPIN SANGHI
SANJEEV NARULA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
