Case LawHigh Court › D.b. Income Tax Appeal v. M/ S.singhal A...

D.b. Income Tax Appeal v. M/ S.singhal Associates

High Court 25 Feb 2015 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · jaipur
Parties
D.b. Income Tax Appeal v. M/ S.singhal Associates
Date of order
25 Feb 2015
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In D.b. Income Tax Appeal v. M/ S.singhal Associates, the High Court (2015) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: 5.This Income Tax Appeal is consequently 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 FOR RAJASTHANAT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR :: JUDGMENT :: D.B. INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.809/ 2008The Commissioner of Income Tax, Alwar Vs. M/ s.Singhal Associates 25.2.2015 HON'BLE THE ACTI NG CHI EF JUSTI CE MR. SUNI L AMBW ANIHON'BLE MR. JUSTI CE PRAKASH GUPTA Ms.Parinitoo Jain for the appellant. Mr.Mahendra Gargieya with Ms.Manisha Surana for the respondent. * * * * * * * * 1.In the present appeal filed by Commissioner of Income Tax,Alwar, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JaipurBench 'A', Jaipur dated 30.3.2007 in ITA No.195/ JP/ 2005 for theassessment year 1998-99, the tax effect of the appeal is less thanRs.4 lacs. 2.In view of Instruction No.2 of 2005 dated 24.10.2005 issued byCBDT, advising the Income Tax Department not to prefer appealsunder Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, if the tax effect isless than Rs.4 lacs, the appeal is not to be filed by the Department,unless the question of law is likely to arise repeatedly in the case ofthe assessee or in similar cases. 3.In the present case, the Income Tax Appeal has been preferredon the ground that the Tribunal was not justified in holding that thenotice under Section 148 of the Act was not valid, and further, that theorder of Tribunal is perverse. 4.The questions of law raised in this appeal, having tax effect ofless than Rs.4 lacs, are not such, which may repeatedly arise, either inthe case of the assessee, or in similar cases. 5.This Income Tax Appeal is consequently dismissed. ( PRAKASH GUPTA) ,J. ( SUNI L AMBW ANI ) ,ACTG.CJ. Skant/ -, Proof Reader Al l t he cor r ect i ons made i n t he j udgment / or der have been i ncor por at edi n t he j udgment / or der bei ng emai l ed. Shashi Kant Gaur ,Pr oof Reader
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ Defend a reassessment (Sec 148) notice → 💬 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