Ita/154/2009 Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kolkata-Xiv v. M/S. Fibre Box Company
High Court
13 Feb 2023 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · calcutta_original_side
Parties
Ita/154/2009 Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kolkata-Xiv v. M/S. Fibre Box Company
Date of order
13 Feb 2023
Assessment year(s)
1999-00
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Ita/154/2009 Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kolkata-Xiv v. M/S. Fibre Box Company, the High Court (2023) decided the matter.
Decision: For the above reason, the appeal stands disposed of on the ground of lowtax effect and the substantial question of law is left open.
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
O-76
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTASPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX)ORIGINAL SIDE
ITA/154/2009COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-XIVVS.M/S. FIBRE BOX COMPANY
BEFORE :
THE HON’BLE JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM
AndTHE HON’BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYADate : 13[th] February, 2023
Appearance :Mr. Prithu Dudhoria, Adv.… for appellant
The Court : This appeal filed by the revenue filed under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax, 1961 (the Act) is directed against the order dated 24[th]December, 2008, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” Bench,Kolkata (Tribunal) in ITA Nos. 1301 and 983/Kol/2008 for the assessment year1999-00.
The appeal was admitted on 28[th] January, 2010 on the followingsubstantial questions of law :-
“Whether the learned Tribunal is justified in law in holding that Section 45sub-section (4) has come into operation after 1[st] April, 1999 when thepartnership firm stood dissolved and thereby did not apply the saidprovision ?”
We have heard Mr. Prithu Dudhoria, learned standing counsel appearingfor the appellant.
Learned standing counsel upon referring to the order passed by theCommissioner of Income tax (Appeals) XII, dated 30[th] April, 2008 points out thatthe tax effect in this appeal is Rs.26,86,946/-. If that be so, the revenue cannotpursue this appeal as it is well below the threshold limit of Rs.1 Crore as fixedby the CBDT.
For the above reason, the appeal stands disposed of on the ground of lowtax effect and the substantial question of law is left open.
(T.S. SIVAGNANAM, J.)
(HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, J.)
SN/S.Pal
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.