Itxa/1115/2008 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -21, Mumbai v. Shri Vijay C. Kamdar
High Court
14 Dec 2015 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/1115/2008 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -21, Mumbai v. Shri Vijay C. Kamdar
Date of order
14 Dec 2015
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Itxa/1115/2008 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -21, Mumbai v. Shri Vijay C. Kamdar, the High Court (2015) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: 3.Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 1115 OF 2008
The Commissioner of Income Tax-21Mumbai
.. Appellant
v/s.
Vijay C. Kamdar
..Respondent
Mr. A.R. Malhotra a/w N.A. Kazi for the appellant Mr. K. Gopal a/w Jitendra Singh for the respondent
CORAM : M.S. SANKLECHA & G.S. KULKARNI, J.J.
DATED : 14[th] DECEMBER, 2015.
P.C.
1.Mr. Malhotra, learned Counsel for the Revenue invites our
attention to Circular No.21/2015 dated 10[th] December, 2015
issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. The aforesaid circular inter alia provides at paragraphs 3 and 10 thereof, as under :-
“3.Henceforth, appeals / SLPs shall not be filed in cases where the tax effect does not exceed the monetary limits given hereunder :-
It is clarified that an appeal should not be filed merely because the tax effect in a case exceeds the monetary limits prescribed above. Filing of appeal in such cases is to be decided on meritsof the case.”
“10. This instruction will apply retrospectively to pending appeals and appeals to be filed henceforth in High Courts/ Tribunals. Pending appeals below the specified tax limitsin para 3 above may be withdrawn / not pressed. Appeals before the Supreme Court will be governed by the instructions on this subject, operative at the time when such appeal was filed.”
2.In view of the above, Mr. Malhotra, learned Counsel for the
appellant does not press the appeal as the tax effect in this case is Rs.14.24 lakhs.
3.Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
(G.S. KULKARNI, 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.