Itxa/796/2015 Of Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Dharni Properties Pvt.ltd

jsn IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 796 OF 2015 The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, … AppellantVersusDharni Properties Pvt. Ltd.…Respondent Mr. Arvind Pinto, for the Appellant.Mr. Dhiraj Katiyal, i/b SRM Law Associates for the Respondent. CORAM:M.S.SANKLECHARIYAZ I. CHAGLA, JJ.DATED:30TH JANUARY 2018 PC:- 1.Mr. Katiyal, appears for the Respondent and states that he has been briefed by the Respondent and undertakes to file his Vakalatnama during the course of the day. 2.This Appeal relates to Assessment Year 2007-08. 3.Mr. Pinto, learned Counsel appearing for the Revenue invited our attention to Circular No.21 of 2015 issued by the Central Board for Direct Tax dated 10[th ] December, 2015. In particular, our attention is invited to paragraphs Nos. 3 and 10 therein, which read as under:- “3:-Henceforth, appeals / SLPs shall not be filed in cases where the tax effect does not exceed the monetary limits given hereunder:- It is clarified that an appeal should not be filed merely because the 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 to be filed henceforth in High Courts/ Tribunals. Pending appeals below the specified tax limits in para 3 above may be withdrawn/not pressed. Appeals before the Supreme Court will be governed by the instructions on this subject, operative at the time when such appeal was filed.” 4.In the present case, the tax effect is Rs.12.88 lakhs as mentioned in paragraph 11 of the Appeal Memo. 5.In view of the above, Mr. Pinto, learned Counsel appearing for the Revenue does not press the present Appeal. 6.Accordingly, Appeal dismissed, as not pressed. 7.Refund of Court Fees, as per Rules. ( RIYAZ I. CHAGLA J. ) (M.S.SANKLECHA,J.)