The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Tds-1, Mumbai v. Hathway Cable And Datacom Ltd
High Court
04 Feb 2020 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Tds-1, Mumbai v. Hathway Cable And Datacom Ltd
Date of order
04 Feb 2020
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Tds-1, Mumbai v. Hathway Cable And Datacom Ltd, the High Court (2020) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: 4.In that view of the matter, the appeal is dismissed aswithdrawn.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYO.O.C.J.
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 1599 OF 2017
The Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS-1, Mumbai..Appellant
Versus
Hathway Cable and Datacom Ltd..Respondent
...................
Mr. P.C. Chhotaray for the Appellant Mr. Bharat Damodar i/by Kanga & Co for the Respondent...................
CORAM : UJJAL BHUYAN &
MILIND N. JADHAV, JJ.
DATE : FEBRUARY 4, 2020.
P.C.:
1.Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2.This appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,1961 ("the Act" for short) is preferred by the revenueagainst the order dated 7.9.2016 passed by the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal, Mumbai "H" Bench, Mumbai ("Tribunal"for short) in Income Tax Appeal No. 3512/Mum/2014 for theassessment year 2002-03.
3.Mr. Chhotaray, learned standing counsel, revenue for
the appellant fairly submits that the disputed tax effect inthis appeal is Rs. 51,29,096.00 which is below the enhancedprescribed limit for filing of appeal before the High Court interms of CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 dated 8.8.2019.
4.In that view of the matter, the appeal is dismissed aswithdrawn.
5.Court fees paid to be refunded as per rules.
[ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] [ UJJAL BHUYAN, J. ]
Digitally signedRavindraby Ravindra M.AmberkarM.Date:Amberkar2020.02.0610:29:33+0530
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.