Itta/25/2016 Of The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-4 v. M/S Microsoft Global Services Center P Ltd
High Court
07 Jun 2016 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Itta/25/2016 Of The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-4 v. M/S Microsoft Global Services Center P Ltd
Date of order
07 Jun 2016
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Itta/25/2016 Of The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-4 v. M/S Microsoft Global Services Center P Ltd, the High Court (2016) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: The appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHANAnd
THE HON’BLE SRIJUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
I.T.T.A.M.P.No.32 of 2016IN/ANDI.T.T.A.No.25 of 2016
COMMON ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ramesh Ranganathan)
Sri J.V.Prasad, learned Senior Standing Counsel for Income Tax, submitsI.T.T.A.M.P.No.32 of 2016 is filed seeking permission to withdraw the mainappeal as the tax effect involved in this matter is below the monetary limitsprescribed by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, vide Circular No.21 of 2015,dated 10.12.2015.
Permission is accorded. I.T.T.A.M.P.No.32 of 2016 is disposed ofaccordingly.
The appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. Miscellaneous Petitions pending, ifany, shall stand dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
______________________________
RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J
07[th] June, 2016.JSU
__________________________________
M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY, J
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHANAnd
THE HON’BLE SRIJUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
JSU
I.T.T.A.M.P.No.32 of 2016IN/ANDI.T.T.A.No.25 of 2016
Date: 07.06.2016
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