Itxa/214/2016 Of The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-6, Pune v. Mala Mohanlal Bajaj

* 1/2 * ITXA-214-2016 (SR. 41) Thursday, 7.6.2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL (LODG) NO. 214 OF 2016 The Pr. Commissioner of IncomeTax-6, Pune….Appellant V/s.Mala Mohanlal Bajaj….Respondent * * * * * Mr. Tejveer Singh, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Rohan Deshpande i/by. Mr. M.C. Naniwadekar, Advocate for the respondent. CORAM :- M.S. SANKLECHA, & SANDEEP K. SHINDE, JJ.DATE :-7TH JUNE, 2018. P.C. :- 1. This Appeal relates to Assessment Year 2010-11. 2Mr. Tejveer Singh, learned Counsel appearing for the Revenue invited our attention to Circular No.21 of 2015 issued by the Central Board for Direct Tax dated 10[th ]December, 2015. In particular, our attention is invited to paragraphs Nos.3 and 10 therein, which read as under:- “-3:Henceforth, appeals/SLPs shall not be filed in cases where the tax effect does not exceed the monetary limits given hereunder:- Rane 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 merits of the case.” “-10:Thisinstructionwillapply retrospectively to pending appeals and appeals to be filed henceforth in High Courts/ Tribunals. Pending appeals below the specified tax limits in para 3 above may be withdrawn/not pressed.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.” 3In the present case, the tax effect is Rs.12.29 lakhs as mentioned in paragraph-12 of the Appeal Memo. 4In view of the above, on instructions, Mr. Singh, learned Counsel appearing for the Revenue does not press the present Appeal. 5Accordingly, Appeal dismissed, as withdrawn. 6Refund of Court Fees, as per Rules. (SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J) (M.S. SANKLECHA, J)