Itxa/165/2016 Of Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, 9, Mumbai v. Amenity Software Pvt. Ltd
High Court
13 Aug 2018 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/165/2016 Of Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, 9, Mumbai v. Amenity Software Pvt. Ltd
Date of order
13 Aug 2018
Assessment year(s)
2008-09
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Itxa/165/2016 Of Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, 9, Mumbai v. Amenity Software Pvt. Ltd, the High Court (2018) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: Accordingly, Appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.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
Rane
1/2ITXA-165-2016 (SR.43)13.8.2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 165 OF 2016
Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax-9, Mumbai….Appellant
V/s.Amenity Software Pvt. Ltd.….Respondent
*****
Mr. Arvind Pinto, Advocate for the appellant.
Coram : M.S. Sanklecha, &
Sandeep K. Shinde, JJ.
Monday, 13th August, 2018.
P.C. :
1. This Appeal relates to Assessment Year 2008-09.
2. Mr. Pinto, Learned Counsel appearing for theRevenue invited our attention to Circular No.3 of 2018dated 11[th] July, 2018 issued by the Central Board for DirectTax (CBDT). The above Circular directs the Officers of theRevenue not to file appeals to the High Court where the tax
Rane
2/2ITXA-165-2016 (SR.43)13.8.2018
effect does not exceed Rs.50 lakhs. It also directs itsOfficers to withdraw/not press its pending appeals wherethe tax effect is less than Rs.50 lakhs. This, of course, if itdoes not fall in the excluded class of appeals listed therein.
3. In view of the Circular No.3 of 2018 dated 11[th]July, 2018 issued by the CBDT, Mr. Pinto, Learned Counselappearing for the Revenue, on instructions of Mr. VidhuShekher Singh, Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax,seeks to withdraw this Appeal.
4.
Accordingly, Appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.
5. Refund of court-fees as per Rules.
(SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J)
(M.S. SANKLECHA, J)
Digitally signedNeetaby NeetaShaileshShailesh SawantDate:Sawant2018.08.1611:50:13 +0530
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