Itxa/292/2016 Of The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-9 v. M/S C.r. Developments P. Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 292 OF 2016 The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-9 … Appellant V/s. M/s. C.R. Developments Pvt. Ltd. … Respondent ----- Mr. Arvind Pinto for the Appellant.Ms. Namrata Kasale I/b Sameer Dalal for the Respondent. CORAM : M.S. SANKLECHA & SANDEEP K. SHINDE, JJ.DATE : 05[th] JULY, 2018 P.C.:.This appeal relates to Assessment Year 2009-2010. 2Mr. Pinto, learned Counsel appearing for the Revenue invited our attention to Circular No.21 of 2015 issued by the Central Board for Direct Tax dated10[th ] December, 2015. In particular, our attention is invited to paragraphs 3 and10 therein which read as under:- “3:-Henceforth, appeals/SLPs shall not be filed in cases where the taxeffect does not exceed the monetary limits given hereunder:- S. No.Appeals in Income Tax mattersMonetary Limit (inRs.)1Before Appellate Tribunal10,00,000/- 2Before High Court20,00,000/-3Before Supreme Court25,00,000/- It is clarified that an appeal should not be filed merely becausethe 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:-This instruction will apply retrospectively to pending appeals and appeals tobe filed henceforth in High Courts/ Tribunals. Pending appeals below the specifiedtax limits in para 3 above may be withdrawn/not pressed. Appeals before theSupreme Court will be governed by the instructions on this subject, operative at thetime when such appeal was filed.” 2The Tax effect in the present appeal is Rs.11,37,000/- as mentioned inparagraph 10 of the appeal memo. In view of the above, Mr. Pinto, learnedCounsel for the Revenue on instructions does not press the present appeal. 3Hence, appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. 4Refund of court fees as per Rules. (SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J.) (M.S. SANKLECHA, J.)