Case LawHigh Court › Txa/17/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Incom...

Txa/17/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Pyramid Finance Ltd

High Court 11 Jan 2016 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · hcbgoa
Parties
Txa/17/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Pyramid Finance Ltd
Date of order
11 Jan 2016
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

Case summary

In Txa/17/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Pyramid Finance Ltd, the High Court (2016) decided the matter.

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 BOMBAY AT GOA TAX APPEAL NO. 17/2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax,having office at Aayakar Bhavan, Patto-Plaza, Panaji-Goa. VersusPyramid Finance Ltd.,Salgaoncar House, … Appellant. F.L.Gomes Road, Vasco-da-Gama, Goa … Respondent ….. Ms. Asha Desai, Advocate for the appellant.Mr. A.F. Diniz, Advocate for the respondent. ..... Coram: F. M. REIS & K. L. WADANE, JJ.Date : 11[th] January, 2016. Oral Judgment (Per F.M. REIS, J): 1]Heard Ms. Asha Desai, learned counsel appearing for theappellant and Mr. Diniz, learned counsel appearing for the respondent . 2]The above appeal was admitted by order dated 23[rd]September, 2009, on the following substantial question of law:- “Whether the facts in the circumstances of the case,the I.T.A.T. was justified in law in holding that leaseequalization charges could not be regarded asamount transferred to reserve as envisaged u/sexplanation to (b) section115 JA (2) 115JB (2),though explanation (b) contemplates reserve anynature except as specified in section 33AC.” 3] During the course of arguments of the above appeal, it waspointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant that thetax effect of the appeal is less than Rs. Twenty lakhs and as such, this iscovered by paragraph 10 of the Circular dated 10[th] December, 2015issued by the Government of India. The learned counsel appearing forthe respondent does not dispute this position. Paragraph 10 of suchCircular read thus:- “This instruction will apply retrospectively to pendingappeals and appeals to be filed henceforth in HighCourts/ Tribunals. Pending appeals below the specifiedtax limits in para 3 above may be withdrawn/not pressed.Appeals before the Supreme Court will be governed by theinstructions on this subject, operative at the time whensuch appeal was filed”. Taking note of the said Circular, the question of entertaining the above appeal does not arise. The above appeal stands disposed ofaccordingly. K. L. WADANE, J. F. M. REIS, J. mukund
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