Ita/64/2012 Commissioner Of Income Tax Central – Ii, Kolkata v. M/S. Basil International Limited
High Court
28 Nov 2023 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · calcutta_original_side
Parties
Ita/64/2012 Commissioner Of Income Tax Central – Ii, Kolkata v. M/S. Basil International Limited
Date of order
28 Nov 2023
Assessment year(s)
2006-07
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Ita/64/2012 Commissioner Of Income Tax Central – Ii, Kolkata v. M/S. Basil International Limited, the High Court (2023) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: In view of the aforesaid, the appeal is dismissed in terms of being below the monetary limit fixed under the aforesaid Circular for filing of the appeal.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
OD – 20
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Special Jurisdiction [Income Tax]
ORIGINAL SIDE
ITA/64/2012 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL – II, KOLKATA
-Versus-
M/S. BASIL INTERNATIONAL LIMITED
BEFORE :
THE HON’BLE JUSTICE SURYA PRAKASH KESARWANI And THE HON’BLE JUSTICE RAJARSHI BHARADWAJDate : 28[th] November, 2023
Appearance : Mr.Smita Das De, Adv. ..for the appellant.
The Court : Heard Ms. Smita Das De, learned counsel
for the income tax department/appellant. This appeal relates to assessment year 2006-07. The learned counsel for the appellant has filed today affidavit of service which is taken on record. Perusal of the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) dated 1[st] September, 2009 reveals that the tax effect would be less than the monetary limit fixed for filing of the appeal under the Circular No.17/2019 dated 8[th] August, 2019. The learned counsel for the appellant does not dispute the aforesaid position of facts.
In view of the aforesaid, the appeal is dismissed in terms of being below the monetary limit fixed under the
aforesaid Circular for filing of the appeal. (SURYA PRAKASH KESARWANI, J.) (RAJARSHI BHARADWAJ, J.)
S.Das/
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