Case LawHigh Court › Itxa.519.2015 Os.doc v. Patil

Itxa.519.2015 Os.doc v. Patil

High Court 23 Aug 2022 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa.519.2015 Os.doc v. Patil
Date of order
23 Aug 2022
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Itxa.519.2015 Os.doc v. Patil, the High Court (2022) decided the matter.

Decision: 17 of 2019, the Appeal is disposed of asinvolving low tax efect.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 519 OF 2015 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax- 10,Room No. 416, 4[th] Floor, Aayakar Bhawan,M. K. Road, Mumbai Versus …Appellant M/s Lexicon Chemicals Pvt. Ltd.,3[rd] Floor, Ahura Centre, 82, MahakaliCaves Road, Andheri (E), Mumbai ...Respondent **** Mr. Arvind Pinto, Advocate for the Appellant. Ms. Aasifa Khan a/w Mr. Satish Mody, Advocate for the Respondent. **** CORAM :DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR ANDABHAY AHUJA, JJ. P.C.: DATE : 23[rd] AUGUST, 2022. .Learned Counsel for the Appellant states that the tax efect in thepresent Appeal is below the limit stipulated in terms of Circular No. 17 of2019 dated 08[th] August, 2019. It is stated that no instructions have beenreceived from the Department to withdraw the present Appeal. 2.In the light of Circular No. 17 of 2019, the Appeal is disposed of asinvolving low tax efect. 3.However, we observe that in case, the Revenue fnds for somereason that the Appeal was not supposed to have been withdrawn in thelight of the Circular, it would be open to the Revenue to fle an applicationseeking restoration of the Appeal to be decided on its own merits. Refund ofCourt-fees as per rules. (ABHAY AHUJA, J.) (DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, J.)
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan