Itxa/1427/2017 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax-Ltu v. Aditya Birla Minacs Bpo Pvt Ltd

Sonali Kilaje IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTIONINCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 1427 OF 2017 Commissioner of Income Tax- LTU ..Appellant v/s. Aditya Birla Minacs BPO Pvt. Ltd. ..Respondent Mr. Suresh Kumar a/w. Ms. Priyanka Tiwary for the Appellant.Mr. Atul K. Jasani for the Respondent. CORAM: UJJAL BHUYAN & MILIND N. JADHAV, JJ. DATE : FEBRUARY 11, 2020 P. C :- 1.Heard Mr. Suresh Kumar, learned standingcounsel revenue for the appellant and Mr.Atul Jasani,learned counsel for the respondent-assessee. 2.This appeal under Section 260A of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act” for short) is preferred against theorder dated 18.10.2016 passed by the Income-Tax Sonali Kilaje 3-ITXA-1427-17.doc Appellate Tribunal, "K" Bench, Mumbai (“Tribunal” forshort) in Income Tax Appeal No. 566/Mum/2015 for theAssessment Year 2010-11. 3.As per the assessment order dated 28.11.2014total income of the respondent-assessee was determined atRs.1,37,30,018.00. It is submitted that the tax efect wouldbe well below the enhanced prescribed limit of Rs.1 Crore interms of Circular No. 17 of 2019 of Government of India,Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Boardof Direct Taxes dated 08.08.2019. 4.On 07.01.2020 learned standing counsel soughtfor time to ascertain the tax efect involved in this appealand also to take instructions in terms of the aforesaidcircular. 5.Today, when the matter is called upon, Mr.Kumar,learned standing counsel submits that he has not receivedany instruction. 6. Be that as it may, in view of the aforesaid Circular the appeal stands dismissed as withdrawn. However, if theappellant fnds that the appeal is covered by any of theexceptions mentioned in the said circular, appellant wouldbe at liberty to seek revival of the appeal. 7.Court fee paid may be returned as per rules. (MILIND N. JADHAV, J.) (UJJAL BHUYAN, J.)