Case LawHigh Court › Itxa/914/2008 Of The Commissioner Of Inc...

Itxa/914/2008 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-3, Mumbai v. M/S Elite Agencies Pvt. Ltd

High Court 09 Aug 2018 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/914/2008 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-3, Mumbai v. M/S Elite Agencies Pvt. Ltd
Date of order
09 Aug 2018
Assessment year(s)
1998-99
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In Itxa/914/2008 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-3, Mumbai v. M/S Elite Agencies Pvt. Ltd, the High Court (2018) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

The order — as passed by the High Court

Uday S. Jagtap THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 914 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income Tax-3 .. Appellant v/s. M/s. Elite Agencies Pvt. Ltd. ..Respondent Mr. Suresh Kumar for the appellant None for the respondent CORAM : M.S. SANKLECHA & SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J.J. DATED : 9[th] AUGUST, 2018. P.C. 1.This Appeal relates to Assessment Year 1998-99. 2.Mr. Suresh Kumar, learned Counsel appearing for the Revenueinvited our attention to Circular No.3 of 2018 dated 11[th] July, 2018issued by the Central Board for Direct Tax (CBDT). The aboveCircular directs the Officers of the Revenue not to file appeals to theHigh Court where the tax effect does not exceed Rs.50 lakhs. It alsodirects its Officers to withdraw / not press its pending appeals wherethe tax effect is less than Rs.50 lakhs. This, of course, if it does not fallin the excluded class of appeals listed therein. 3.Our attention is invited to para 14 of the Appeal Memo, whichDigitallysigned byUdayUday Shivajiindicates that in this Appeal, the tax effect is Rs. 44 lakhs. JagtapShivajiDate:2018.08.13Jagtap10:53:47+0530 4.In view of the Circular No.3 of 2018 dated 11[th] July, 2018 issuedby the CBDT, Mr. Suresh Kumar, learned Counsel appearing for theRevenue, on instructions from Mr. P. Satish Reddy, ACIT, does notpress the present Appeal. 5.Accordingly, Appeal dismissed, as withdrawn. 6.Refund of Court Fees, if any, as per Rules. (SANDEEP K. SHINDE J.) (M.S. SANKLECHA, 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