Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kol-Iii, Kolkata v. In View Of The Aforesaid, The Appeal [Ita/29/2011] Is Dismissed
High Court
14 Dec 2023 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · calcutta_original_side
Parties
Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kol-Iii, Kolkata v. In View Of The Aforesaid, The Appeal [Ita/29/2011] Is Dismissed
Date of order
14 Dec 2023
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kol-Iii, Kolkata v. In View Of The Aforesaid, The Appeal [Ita/29/2011] Is Dismissed, the High Court (2023) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: In view of the aforesaid, the appeal is dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
OD – 8
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction [Income Tax]
ORIGINAL SIDE
ITA/29/2011 IA NO.GA/1/2010 (Old No.GA/3356/2010)
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOL-III, KOLKATA
-Versus-
BEFORE : THE HON’BLE JUSTICE SURYA PRAKASH KESARWANI And THE HON’BLE JUSTICE RAJARSHI BHARADWAJDate : 14[th] December, 2023
Appearance :Sri Om Narayan Rai, Adv. Sri Soumen Bhattacharjee, Adv. ..for the appellant.
Sri J.P. Khaitan, Sr. Adv. Sri Kanakendu Chatterjee, Adv. ...for the respondent.
1. Heard Sri Om Narayan Rai, learned senior standing counsel for the appellant/Income Tax Department and Sri J.P. Khaitan, learned senior counsel assisted by Sri Kanakendu Chatterjee, learned advocate for the respondent/assessee.
2. Pursuant to our order dated 5.12.2023, learned counsel for the appellant has produced before us a computation sheet dated 11.12.2023 sent by Sri Jai Prakash Yadav, ACIT, Circle – 7 (1), Kolkata, which is kept on record. 3. As per the computation sheet, as produced by the learned counsel for the appellant, the tax effect is Rs.39,69,298/-
which is much below the minimum prescribed limit, for filing the appeal by the revenue, in terms of Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019. Under the circumstances, the appeal deserves to be dismissed on account of tax effect being below the minimum prescribed limit.
4. In view of the aforesaid, the appeal is dismissed.
(SURYA PRAKASH KESARWANI, J.)
(RAJARSHI BHARADWAJ, J.)
S.Das/
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.
EaseValue