Case LawHigh Court › The Commissioner Of Income Tax – Ii, Pun...

The Commissioner Of Income Tax – Ii, Pune v. Shri Rahul Maruti Galande

High Court 15 Feb 2010 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax – Ii, Pune v. Shri Rahul Maruti Galande
Date of order
15 Feb 2010
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In The Commissioner Of Income Tax – Ii, Pune v. Shri Rahul Maruti Galande, the High Court (2010) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: 2.Since the tax effect is less than Rs.4,00,000/-, in view of Instruction No.5 of 2008 dated 15[th] May 2008 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, the Appeal is dismissed.

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 BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.725 OF 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax – II, Pune ..Appellant. Versus Shri Rahul Maruti Galande ..Respondent. Mr.Vimal Gupta for the appellant.Dr.K. Shivram with Mr.Ajay R. Singh for the respondent. CORAM : Dr.D.Y. Chandrachud & J.P. Devadhar, JJ. DATE : 15[th] Ferbuary, 2010. P.C. : 1.From the averments contained in Paragraph 11 of the memo of Appeal filed by the Revenue, it is evident that the tax effect, even according to the Revenue is less than Rs.4,00,000/-. The averment in paragraph 11 however is that the appeal has been filed since the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is a composite order in nine cases of the same family. The expression ‘composite order’ has been construed in the judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax V/s. Polycott Corporation,[1] to mean an order in respect of the same assessee for more than one year. In the present case admittedly the order of the Tribunal was not a composite order as explained by the Division Bench as different assessees are involved. In the case of the assessee, only one year is in issue. 2.Since the tax effect is less than Rs.4,00,000/-, in view of Instruction No.5 of 2008 dated 15[th] May 2008 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, the Appeal is dismissed. There shall be refund of court fee, if any as per Rules. (J.P. Devadhar, J.) (Dr.D.Y. Chandrachud, 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