Case Law › High Court › The Commissioner Of Income Taxi, Bhopal...

The Commissioner Of Income Taxi, Bhopal v. C.i. Builders Pvt. Ltd

High Court 08 Nov 2019 In favour of: Assessee

Forum / Bench

High Court · mphc_db_jbp

Parties

Date of order

08 Nov 2019

Assessment year(s)

—

Outcome

Dismissed

Case summary

In The Commissioner Of Income Taxi, Bhopal v. C.i. Builders Pvt. Ltd, the High Court (2019) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed as withdrawn withliberty as prayed for.

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

The order — as passed by the High Court

psm/- THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH ITA No.101/2012 -(The Commissioner of Income TaxI, Bhopal vs. C.I. Builders Pvt. Ltd.) Jabalpur, Dated :08.11.2019 Mr. Sanjay Lal, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Mukesh Agrawal, Advocate for the respondent. Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that sincethe tax effect involved is less than Rs.1 Crore, he has instructionsto withdraw the present appeal in view of the Circular No.17/2019dated 8.8.2019 issued by the Government of India, Ministry ofFinance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Direct Taxes(Judicial Section), New Delhi. However, he prayed that liberty begranted to the Revenue to file an application for revival of theappeal, in case something survives therein. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed as withdrawn withliberty as prayed for. It is, however, clarified that withdrawal ofthe appeal by the Revenue shall not be taken to be affirmation oforder of the Tribunal on merits. Further, the legal issue as claimedby the Revenue is being left open to be adjudicated in anappropriate case. (Ajay Kumar Mittal) (Sanjay Yadav) Judge Chief Justice

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.