Itxa/6129/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax-7 v. M/S Swarnim Caplease Pvt Ltd
High Court
24 Nov 2018 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/6129/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax-7 v. M/S Swarnim Caplease Pvt Ltd
Date of order
24 Nov 2018
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Itxa/6129/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax-7 v. M/S Swarnim Caplease Pvt Ltd, the High Court (2018) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: 4.Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as not pressed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 6129 OF 2010
The Commissioner of Income Tax
v/s.
M/s. Swarnim Caplease Services Pvt. Ltd.
.. Appellant
..Respondent
Mr. Suresh Kumar for the appellant
Mr. Mayank Thosar I/b B.V. Jhaveri for the respondent
P.C.
CORAM : AKIL KURESHI &
M.S. SANKLECHA, J.J.
DATED : 24[th] NOVEMBER, 2018.
1.This appeal challenges the order dated 11[th] April, 2005 passed by
the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.
2.Mr. Suresh Kumar, learned Counsel appearing in support of theappeal invites our attention to the Circular No.3/2008 dated 11[th] July,2018 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes which inter aliadirects the Revenue not to press the pending appeals where the taxeffect is less than Rs.50 lakhs.
3.In view of the above Circular, Mr. Suresh Kumar has beeninstructed not to press the appeal as the tax effect involved in thepresent appeal is less than the threshold limits of Rs.50 lakhs.
4.Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as not pressed.
5.Refund of Court Fees as per Rules.
(M.S. SANKLECHA, J.)
(AKIL KURESHI, 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.