Director Of Income Tax (International Taxation), Mumbai v. Dana Corporation Inc, Mumbai 20
High Court
22 Feb 2016 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Director Of Income Tax (International Taxation), Mumbai v. Dana Corporation Inc, Mumbai 20
Date of order
22 Feb 2016
Assessment year(s)
2002-03
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Director Of Income Tax (International Taxation), Mumbai v. Dana Corporation Inc, Mumbai 20, the High Court (2016) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: 2.Accordingly, the Appeal is dismissed as not pressed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.2226 OF 2009
Director of Income Tax (International Taxation), Mumbai v/sDana Corporation Inc, Mumbai 20
… Appellant
… Respondent
Mr Suresh Kumar for Appellant. None for Respondent.
CORAM : M.S. SANKLECHA AND B.P. COLABAWALLA JJ. DATE : 22ND FEBRUARY, 2016
P.C.:-
1.This Appeal relates to Assessment Year 2002-03. Mr Suresh Kumar, learned counsel for the Revenue states that the tax effect in the present Appeal as indicated in para 10 of the Appeal Memos is Rs.10.73 lakhs. He further states that in view of the Central Board of Direct Tax Circular No.21/15 dated 10[th ]December 2015, the tax effect being less than the threshold limits of Rs.20 lakhs provided therein for challenging an order of the Tribunal before this Court, he does not press the present Appeal.
2.Accordingly, the Appeal is dismissed as not pressed. Refund of Court fees as per Rules.
(B.P.COLABAWALLA, J.) (M.S. SANKLECHA, J.)
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