Pr. Commissioner of Income-tax-­24 v. Ananthakrishna L. Belur
[Citation -2019-LL-0218-36]

Citation 2019-LL-0218-36
Appellant Name Pr. Commissioner of Income-tax-­24
Respondent Name Ananthakrishna L. Belur
Court HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 18/02/2019
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags low tax effect
Bot Summary: Mr. Sham Walve, for the Appellant in both the Appeals. P.C: These two Appeals under Section 260 A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, challenge the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. 2 The learned Counsel for the Revenue, states that he has been instructed not to press these appeals. This for the reason that the tax effect in these appeals is less than Rs.50 lakhs as provided in CBDT Circular No.3 of 2018 dated 11th July, 2018. These Appeals are dismissed, as not pressed.


itxal-987-991-2018 IN HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 987 OF 2018 WITH INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 991 OF 2018 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax 24 .. Appellant. v/s. Ananthakrishna L. Belur .. Respondent. Mr. Sham Walve, for Appellant in both Appeals. CORAM: AKIL KURESHI & M.S.SANKLECHA, JJ. DATE : 18th FEBRUARY, 2019. P.C: These two Appeals under Section 260 of Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act), challenge order passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal). 2 learned Counsel for Revenue, states that he has been instructed not to press these appeals. This for reason that tax effect in these appeals is less than Rs.50 lakhs as provided in CBDT Circular No.3 of 2018 dated 11th July, 2018. 3 Therefore, these Appeals are dismissed, as not pressed. 4 Refund of Court Fees, if any, as per Rules. (M.S.SANKLECHA,J.) (AKIL KURESHI,J.) S.R.JOSHI 1 of 1 ::: Uploaded on - 20/02/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 21/02/2019 09:36:44 ::: Pr. Commissioner of Income-tax-24 v. Ananthakrishna L. Belur
Report Error