Commissioner of Income-tax-LTU v. Aditya Birla Minacs BPO Pvt. Ltd
[Citation -2020-LL-0211-10]

Citation 2020-LL-0211-10
Appellant Name Commissioner of Income-tax-LTU
Respondent Name Aditya Birla Minacs BPO Pvt. Ltd.
Court HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 11/02/2020
Assessment Year 2010-11
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags prescribed limit • low tax effect
Bot Summary: Heard Mr. Suresh Kumar, learned standing counsel revenue for the appellant and Mr.Atul Jasani, learned counsel for the respondent-assessee. As per the assessment order dated 28.11.2014 total income of the respondent-assessee was determined at Rs.1,37,30,018. It is submitted that the tax efect would be well below the enhanced prescribed limit of Rs.1 Crore in terms of Circular No. 17 of 2019 of Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Direct Taxes dated 08.08.2019. On 07.01.2020 learned standing counsel sought for time to ascertain the tax efect involved in this appeal and also to take instructions in terms of the aforesaid circular. Today, when the matter is called upon, Mr.Kumar, learned standing counsel submits that he has not received any instruction. Be that as it may, in view of the aforesaid Circular the appeal stands dismissed as withdrawn. If the appellant fnds that the appeal is covered by any of the exceptions mentioned in the said circular, appellant would be at liberty to seek revival of the appeal.


Sonali Kilaje 3-ITXA-1427-17.doc IN HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 1427 OF 2017 Commissioner of Income Tax- LTU Appellant v/s. Aditya Birla Minacs BPO Pvt. Ltd. Respondent Mr. Suresh Kumar a/w. Ms. Priyanka Tiwary for Appellant. Mr. Atul K. Jasani for Respondent. CORAM: UJJAL BHUYAN & MILIND N. JADHAV, JJ. DATE : FEBRUARY 11, 2020 P. C :- 1. Heard Mr. Suresh Kumar, learned standing counsel revenue for appellant and Mr.Atul Jasani, learned counsel for respondent-assessee. 2. This appeal under Section 260A of Income-Tax Act, 1961 ( Act for short) is preferred against order dated 18.10.2016 passed by Income-Tax 1 of 3 Uploaded on - 13/02/2020 Downloaded on - 14/02/2020 09:13:16 Sonali Kilaje 3-ITXA-1427-17.doc Appellate Tribunal, "K" Bench, Mumbai ( Tribunal for short) in Income Tax Appeal No. 566/Mum/2015 for Assessment Year 2010-11. 3. As per assessment order dated 28.11.2014 total income of respondent-assessee was determined at Rs.1,37,30,018.00. It is submitted that tax efect would be well below enhanced prescribed limit of Rs.1 Crore in terms of Circular No. 17 of 2019 of Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Direct Taxes dated 08.08.2019. 4. On 07.01.2020 learned standing counsel sought for time to ascertain tax efect involved in this appeal and also to take instructions in terms of aforesaid circular. 5. Today, when matter is called upon, Mr.Kumar, learned standing counsel submits that he has not received any instruction. 2 of 3 Uploaded on - 13/02/2020 Downloaded on - 14/02/2020 09:13:16 Sonali Kilaje 3-ITXA-1427-17.doc 6. Be that as it may, in view of aforesaid Circular appeal stands dismissed as withdrawn. However, if appellant fnds that appeal is covered by any of exceptions mentioned in said circular, appellant would be at liberty to seek revival of appeal. 7. Court fee paid may be returned as per rules. (MILIND N. JADHAV, J.) (UJJAL BHUYAN, J.) 3 of 3 Uploaded on - 13/02/2020 Downloaded on - 14/02/2020 09:13:16 Commissioner of Income-tax-LTU v. Aditya Birla Minacs BPO Pvt. Ltd
Report Error