Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-21, Mumbai v. Topline Foods

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 24 OF 2018 The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-17 Deven J. Mehta INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 98 OF 2018 The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-30 Madhukant V. Shah INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 162 OF 2018 The Commissioner of Income Tax-22 Mahendra N Gandhi INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 282 OF 2018 Priti Tarun Shah INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 615 OF 2018 The Commissioner of Income Tax-21 Topline Foods

INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 874 OF 2018 The Commissioner of Income Tax-7 Power Master Engineers Pvt. Ltd.

INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 986 OF 2018 The Commissioner of Income Tax-21 Anup Laxmichand Anand INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 989 OF 2018 The Commissioner of Income Tax-31 Hemant A. Desai INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 1139 OF 2018 The Commissioner of Income Tax-21 Sanjay Co-op. Credit Soc. Ltd.

INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 1242 OF 2018 Nirmala Radhakishan Rathi

INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 1642 OF 2018 The Commissioner of Income Tax-30 Madhukant V. Shah INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 1747 OF 2018 Poonam Skyline Construction Mr. Sham Walve for the appellant Mr. Jitendra Singh for respondent in ITXA 874/18 Mr. Sameer Dalal for respondent in ITXA 986/18 CORAM : AKIL KURESHI & M.S. SANKLECHA, J.J.

DATED : 11th DECEMBER, 2018.

P.C.

1.

These appeals challenge the orders passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.

2.

Mr. Walve, learned Counsel appearing in support of the appeals invites our attention to the Circular No.3/2018 dated 11th July, 2018 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes which inter alia directs the Revenue not to press the pending appeals where the tax effect is less than Rs.50 lakhs.

3.

In view of the above Circular, Mr. Walve has been instructed not to press the appeals as the tax effect involved in the present appeals is less than the threshold limits of Rs.50 lakhs. 4.

Accordingly, all appeals are dismissed as not pressed. 5.

Refund of Court Fees as per Rules.

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