Case Law › High Court › Ita/469/2006 Of Commissioner Of Income T...

Ita/469/2006 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Charanjit Kaur

High Court 11 Dec 2019 In favour of: Unclear

Forum / Bench

High Court · dhcdb

Parties

Date of order

11 Dec 2019

Assessment year(s)

—

Outcome

Other

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Ita/469/2006 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Charanjit Kaur, the High Court (2019) decided the matter.

Decision: 1,00,00,000/-;the income tax demand of Rs.52,80,000/- as mentioned in the order of CIT (A) dated 25.11.2002, as alsothe letter dated 20.11.2019 issued by ACIT, Judicial-2, New Delhi, the taxeffect in the present appeal being below the permissible tax effect limit, thepresent appeal is disposed of.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

$~43 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ITA 469/2006COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX..... AppellantThrough:Mr.Zoheb Hossain, Senior StandingCounsel versus CHARANJIT KAUR ..... Respondent Through: CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHIHON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLIO R D E R%11.12.2019 In the light of the circular dated 08.08.2019 issued by the Ministry ofFinance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Direct Taxes (JudicialSection), Government of India, which fixes the monetary limit in respect oftax effect, inter alia, before the High Court in which the Department couldpursue the matter as Rs. 1,00,00,000/-;the income tax demand of Rs.52,80,000/- as mentioned in the order of CIT (A) dated 25.11.2002, as alsothe letter dated 20.11.2019 issued by ACIT, Judicial-2, New Delhi, the taxeffect in the present appeal being below the permissible tax effect limit, thepresent appeal is disposed of. VIPIN SANGHI, J DECEMBER 11, 2019 v REKHA PALLI, J

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.