Itxa/2736/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -1 Mumbai v. M/S. Mahyco Vegetable Seeds Ltd
High Court
22 Aug 2022 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/2736/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -1 Mumbai v. M/S. Mahyco Vegetable Seeds Ltd
Date of order
22 Aug 2022
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Itxa/2736/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -1 Mumbai v. M/S. Mahyco Vegetable Seeds Ltd, the High Court (2022) decided the matter.
Decision: In the light of Circular No.17 of 2019, the appeals are disposed of asinvolving low tax effect.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
PRIYARAJESHSOPARKAR
Digitally signed byPRIYA RAJESHSOPARKARDate: 2022.08.2214:20:25 +0530
Priya Soparkar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.2736 OF 2009AND
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.2090 OF 2009
Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Mumbai.
… Appellant
V/s.
M/s Mahyco Vegetable Seeds Limited
… Respondent
---
Mr.Suresh Kumar, Advocate for the Appellant.Mr.Subhash S. Shetty, Advocate for the Respondent.
---
CORAM : DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR AND ABHAY AHUJA, JJ. DATE : AUGUST 22, 2022.
P.C.:-
1. Learned counsel for the appellant states that the tax effect in thepresent appeals is below the limit stipulated in terms of Circular No.17 of2019 dated 8[th] August, 2019. It is stated that no instructions have beenreceived from the Department to withdraw the present appeals.
2. In the light of Circular No.17 of 2019, the appeals are disposed of asinvolving low tax effect.
3. However, we observe that in case, the Revenue finds for some reasonthat the appeals were not supposed to have been withdrawn in the light ofthe Circular, it would be open to the Revenue to file an application/praecipeseeking restoration of the appeals to be decided on its own merits.
4.Refund of Court-fees as per rules.
(ABHAY AHUJA, J.)
(DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, 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.