Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-25, Mumbai v. Nilesh R Jhaveri(Huf)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.439 OF 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax ... Appellant V/s.

M/s Systematic Exports ... Respondent WITH INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.185 OF 2012 WITH INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.186 OF 2012 WITH INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1069 OF 2013 WITH INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1144 OF 2013 The Commissioner of Income Tax-III ... Appellant V/s.

M/s Tushar Developers ... Respondent WITH INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.692 OF 2013 The Commissioner of Income Tax-I ... Appellant V/s.

Swapnil Distributors Pvt. Ltd.

... Respondent WITH INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.494 OF 2015 The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-3 ... Appellant V/s.

Shri Shankar Krishna Panskar ... Respondent WITH INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.697 OF 2017 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-25 ... Appellant V/s.

Ramesh Jhaveri (HUF) ... Respondent WITH INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.913 OF 2017 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-25 ... Appellant V/s.

Nilesh R. Jhaveri (HUF) ... Respondent --- Mr.Sham Walve for the Appellants in all appeals. Mr.Sham Walve with Ms.Padma Divakar for the Appellants in ITXA Nos.1069 of 2013 and 1144 of 2013.

Mr.S.J.Mehta with Ms.A.Vissanji for the Respondent in ITXA No.439 of 2009.

Mr.Ruturaj Gurjar with Mr.Mihir Naniwadekar for the Respondent in ITXA No.494 of 2015.

--- CORAM : AKIL KURESHI AND M.S.SANKLECHA, JJ.

DATE : DECEMBER 17, 2018.

P.C.:- 1.

These Appeals under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) challenge the orders passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal).

2.

Mr.Sham Walve, learned Counsel appearing for the Revenue states that they have been instructed not to press these appeals. This for the reason that the tax effect in each of these appeals is less than Rs.50 lakhs as provided in CBDT Circular No.3 of 2018

dated 11th July, 2018.

3.

Accordingly, all these Appeals are dismissed as not pressed. 4.

Refund of Court Fees, as per Rules.

(M.S.SANKLECHA,J.) (AKIL KURESHI,J.) ....