Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle – Ii, Muzaffarpur v. M/S Sallauddin, At + P.o. Chhatradhari Bazar, Chapra
High Court
21 Nov 2014 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · patnahcucisdb94
Parties
Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle – Ii, Muzaffarpur v. M/S Sallauddin, At + P.o. Chhatradhari Bazar, Chapra
Date of order
21 Nov 2014
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle – Ii, Muzaffarpur v. M/S Sallauddin, At + P.o. Chhatradhari Bazar, Chapra, the High Court (2014) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: In the aforesaid circumstances, the appeal is dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNAMiscellaneous Appeal No.342 of 2008
======================================================
1.The Commissioner of Income Tax, Muzaffarpur,
2.Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle – II, Muzaffarpur,
.... Assessing Officer/Appellants
Versus
M/s Sallauddin, at + P.O. Chhatradhari Bazar, Chapra
.... .... Respondents
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellants : Ms. Archana Sinha, Sr. S.C.
Mr. Suman Kr. Mishra, Jr. S.C.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH KUMAR DATTA and HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE RAVI RANJANORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH KUMAR DATTA)
5 21-11-2014 Heard learned counsel for the appellant-Income Tax Department.
At the outset, it is pointed out that the tax effect in the present matter is approximately to the tune of Rs. 2,17,000/-, whereas, as per the Instruction No.02/2005 dated 24.10.2005 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act should not be filed in the High Court unless the tax effect is more than rupees four lacs or as per the amendment made in the year 2007, a substantial question of law is involved therein which is of a recurring nature.
No substantial question of law could be pointed out to us by learned counsel for the appellants as being involved in the present matter.
In the aforesaid circumstances, the appeal is
dismissed.
(Ramesh Kumar Datta, J)
SC/-
(Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J)
U
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.