Case LawHigh Court › Commissioner Of Income Tax (Tds v. Hp Bu...

Commissioner Of Income Tax (Tds v. Hp Bus Stand Management & Development …Respondent.authority

High Court 31 Mar 2016 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · cmis
Parties
Commissioner Of Income Tax (Tds v. Hp Bus Stand Management & Development …Respondent.authority
Date of order
31 Mar 2016
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Commissioner Of Income Tax (Tds v. Hp Bus Stand Management & Development …Respondent.authority, the High Court (2016) decided the matter.

Decision: 3.As such, the present appeal stands disposed of.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA ITA No. 28 of 2014 Decided on: 31.03.2016 Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) …Appellant. Versus HP Bus Stand Management & Development …Respondent.Authority Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Chief Justice.The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sureshwar Thakur, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the appellant:Mr. Vinay Kuthiala, Senior Advocate,with Mr. Diwan Singh Negi, Advocate.For the respondent:Mr. Sushant Kaprate, Advocate, viceMr. Vishal Mohan, Advocate. Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Chief Justice.(Oral) Pursuant to circular No. 21/2015 issued vide F. No. 279/Misc.142/2007-ITJ(Pt) by Government of India,Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central BoardDirect Taxes dated 10.12.2015, an office order dated 4[th] JB) of this Court to the following effect: “Hon’ble the Chief Justice has beenpleased to order in pursuance ofcircular No. 21/2015 issued vide F.No. 279/Misc.142/2007-ITJ(Pt) byGovernment of India, Ministry ofFinance, Department of Revenue,Central Board Direct Taxes dated10.12.2015 as under: “(1) It is to be specificallymentioned by the Income TaxDepartment while filing theappeal in the High Court that thetax effect exceeds Rs.20,00,000/-except in the following matters: (a) Where the Constitutionalvalidity of the provisions of an Actor Rule are under challenge, or (b) Where Board’s order,Notification,InstructionorCircular has been held to beillegal or ultra vires, or (c) Where Revenue Audit objectionin the case has been accepted bythe Department, or (d) Where the additional relates toundisclosed foreign assets/bankaccounts. 2. The pending appeals where thetax effect does not exceedRs.20,00,000/- are directed to bewithdrawn/not pressed.” 2. It is not in dispute that the total tax factor is less than 20,00,000/- in this appeal and the same does not fall₹within anyone of the exceptions. 3.As such, the present appeal stands disposed of. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (Mansoor Ahmad Mir) Chief Justice March 31, 2016 ( rajni ) (Sureshwar Thakur) Judge
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