Commissioner Of Income Tax,Central Circle-Xvii, Kolkata v. Jsis Agro (P) Ltd
High Court
16 Sep 2022 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · calcutta_original_side
Parties
Commissioner Of Income Tax,Central Circle-Xvii, Kolkata v. Jsis Agro (P) Ltd
Date of order
16 Sep 2022
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Commissioner Of Income Tax,Central Circle-Xvii, Kolkata v. Jsis Agro (P) Ltd, the High Court (2022) decided the matter.
Issue: The appeal was admitted on the following substantialquestion of law: (i)Whether on the facts and circumstances of thecase, the Tribunal was justified in law inannulling the order under Section 158BD dated31.3.2006 without giving any reasons on themerits of the case ?” We have heard Mr.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
ITA/135/2010
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTASpecial Jurisdiction (Income Tax)ORIGINAL SIDE
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE-XVII, KOLKATA
-Versus-
JSIS AGRO (P) LTD.
Appearance:Mr. Soumen Bhattacharyya, Adv.. . . for the appellant.Mr. J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Adv.Ms. Swapna Das, Adv.Mr. Siddhartha Das, Adv....for the respondent.
BEFORE: The Hon’ble JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM -And- The Hon’ble JUSTICE SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA Date : 16[th] September, 2022.
The Court : This appeal filed by the revenue underSection 260A of the Income Tax Act, is directed against theorder dated 3[rd] July, 2009 passed by the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, “B” Bench, Kolkata (the Tribunal) in IT(SS)ANo.47/Kol/2006 for the block period F.Y. 1985-86 to 1994-95 and1.4.1995 to 21.12.1995.
The appeal was admitted on the following substantialquestion of law:
(i)Whether on the facts and circumstances of thecase, the Tribunal was justified in law inannulling the order under Section 158BD dated31.3.2006 without giving any reasons on themerits of the case ?”
We have heard Mr. Soumen Bhattacharyya, learned
standing counsel for the appellant/revenue and Mr. J.P.Khaitan, learned senior counsel assisted by Ms. Swapna Das andMr. Siddhartha Das, learned advocates for therespondent/assessee.
From the substantial question of law which has beenadmitted it is seen that the tax effect involved in this appealis much less than the threshold limit fixed by the Circularissued by the CBDT. Therefore, the revenue cannot pursue thisappeal.Accordingly, the appeal (ITA/135/2010) stands disposedof on the ground of low tax effect and the substantial questionof law is left open.
(T.S. SIVAGNANAM, J.)
(SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA, J.)
S.Das/As.
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.