The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ranchi, Central Revenue Building v. Sri Purushottam Bagaria
High Court
11 Dec 2018 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · jhar_pg
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ranchi, Central Revenue Building v. Sri Purushottam Bagaria
Date of order
11 Dec 2018
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ranchi, Central Revenue Building v. Sri Purushottam Bagaria, the High Court (2018) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: This appeal is accordingly 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 JHARKHAND AT RANCHITax Appeal No. 41 of 2011
The Commissioner of Income Tax, Ranchi, Central Revenue Building, 5, Main Road, P.O. & P.S. Chutia, District-Ranchi.
….. Appellant
Versus
Sri Purushottam Bagaria, Prop. M/s B.P. Road lines, J.J. Road, Upper Bazar, P.O. G.P.O, P.S. Kotwali, Dist-Ranchi ….. Respondent
….. Respondent
Coram: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.B.MANGALMURTI
-----
For the Appellant Mr. Rahul Lamba, Advocate For the Respondent Mr. Sumeet Gadodia, Advocate
Mr. Sumeet Gadodia, Advocate
-----
Order No.08/ Dated : 11[th] December, 2018Aniruddha Bose, CJ.
Mr. Lamba, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the tax effect of this appeal is below Rs.50 Lakhs and having regard to Circular No. 3 of 2018 issued by the Central Board of Direct
Taxes, he has instruction not to press this appeal.
This appeal is accordingly dismissed as not pressed.
(Aniruddha Bose, CJ.)
(B.B.Mangalmurti, 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.