Itxa/302/2016 Of The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-6, Pune v. Nikhil Vasudev Lund

* 1/2 * Friday, 6.7.2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 302 OF 2016 The Principal Commissioner ofIncome-Tax-6, PuneV/s.Nikhil Vasudev Lund ….Appellant ….Respondent * * * * * Mr. Tejveer Singh, Advocate for the appellant. CORAM :- M.S. SANKLECHA, & SANDEEP K. SHINDE, JJ.DATE :-6TH JULY, 2018. P.C. :- 1. This Appeal relates to Assessment Year 2009-10. 2Mr. Tejveer Singh, learned Counsel appearing forthe Revenue invited our attention to Circular No.21 of 2015issued by the Central Board for Direct Tax dated 10[th]December, 2015. In particular, our attention is invited toparagraphs Nos.3 and 10 therein, which read as under:- “-3:Henceforth, appeals/SLPs shall not be filed incases where the tax effect does not exceed themonetary limits given hereunder:- S. No.Appeals in Income Tax mattersMonetary Limit Friday, 6.7.2018 (in Rs.)1Before Appellate Tribunal10,00,000/-2Before High Court20,00,000/-3Before Supreme Court25,00,000/- It is clarified that an appeal should not be filedmerely because the tax effect in a case exceeds themonetary limits prescribed above. Filing of appealin such cases is to be decided on merits of the case.” “-10:This instruction will apply retrospectively topending appeals and appeals to be filed henceforthin High Courts/ Tribunals. Pending appeals belowthe specified tax limits in para 3 above may bewithdrawn/not pressed. Appeals before theSupreme Court will be governed by the instructionson this subject, operative at the time when suchappeal was filed.” 3In the present case, the tax effect is Rs.10.31 lakhsas mentioned in paragraph-12 of the Appeal Memo. 4In view of the above, Mr. Singh, learned Counselappearing for the Revenue, on instructions does not press thepresent Appeal. 5Accordingly, Appeal dismissed, as not pressed. 6Refund of Court Fees, as per Rules. (SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J) (M.S. SANKLECHA, J)