Case LawHigh Court › Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Tds)-1, Mumb...

Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Tds)-1, Mumbai … v. M/S Dharamdas & Company

High Court 29 Jul 2022 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Tds)-1, Mumbai … v. M/S Dharamdas & Company
Date of order
29 Jul 2022
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

Case summary

In Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Tds)-1, Mumbai … v. M/S Dharamdas & Company, the High Court (2022) decided the matter.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

The order — as passed by the High Court

Chittewan IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.660 OF 2016WITH INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.659 OF 2016 Commissioner of Income-Tax (TDS)-1, Mumbai … Versus Appellant M/s Dharamdas & Company …Respondent *** Mr. Suresh Kumar for the Appellant. Ms. Aasavari Kadam i/b Ms. Aarti Sathe for the Respondent. *** CORAM :DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR &ABHAY AHUJA, JJ. DATE : 29 JULY 2022 P. C. : .Mr. Kumar, learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant states thatthe tax effect in the present Appeals are below the limit stipulated interms of Circular No.17 of 2019 dated 8 August 2019. It is stated that noinstructions have been received from the Department to withdraw thepresent Appeals. 2In the light of Circular No.17 of 2019, the Appeals are disposed ofas involving low tax effect. 3However, we observe that in case, the Revenue finds for somereason that the Appeals were not supposed to have been withdrawn in thelight of the Circular, it would be open to the Revenue to file an applicationseeking restoration of the Appeals to be decided on its own merits.Refund of Court-fees as per rules. (ABHAY AHUJA, J.) (DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, J.)
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan