In Mangala v. Supnekar, the High Court (2017) decided the matter.
Decision: The learned counsel for the appellant seeks leave to withdraw the appeal. avk 1/2 3 The appeal is disposed of as withdrawn.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1046 OF 2013
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II
)...APPELLANT
V/s.
MANGALA V. SUPNEKAR)...RESPONDENT
Mr.Vipul A. Vajpayee, Advocate for the Appellant.
CORAM:S.V.GANGAPURWALA &A. M. BADAR, JJ.DATE:26[th] JULY 2017
P.C. :
1This appeal relates to the Assessment Year 2005-2006. In this appeal, it is submitted that the tax effect is less than Rs.20 lakh.
2In light of the above, and in view of CBDT Circular No.21 of 2015, dated 10th December 2015, the department has taken policy decision not to prosecute the appeals where the tax effect is less than Rs.20 lakh. The learned counsel for the appellant seeks leave to withdraw the appeal.
avk 1/2
3
The appeal is disposed of as withdrawn. No costs.
Court fees as per Rules be refunded.
(A. M. BADAR, J.)
(S.V.GANGAPURWALA, J.)
avk 2/2
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.
EaseValue