Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 5]

Calcutta High Court

Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Ceramic Decorator (P) Ltd on 3 May, 2011

Author: Bhaskar Bhattacharya

Bench: Bhaskar Bhattacharya

                              GA No. 898 of 2011
                              GA No. 899 of 2011
                              ITAT No. 83 of 2011

                      IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                        Special Jurisdiction [Income Tax]
                                 ORIGINAL SIDE


          COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-II, KOLKATA

                                     Versus

                        CERAMIC DECORATOR (P) LTD.


For Appellant     :      Md. Nizumuddin, Advocate


For Respondent :         Mr. R. K. Murarka, with

Ms. S. Roy Chowdhury, Advocates BEFORE:

The Hon'ble JUSTICE BHATTACHARYA The Hon'ble JUSTICE DR. SAMBUDDHA CHAKRABARTI Date : 3rd May, 2011.
Re: GA No. 898 of 2011 After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and after going through the explanation given in the application for condonation of delay, we are satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from preferring the appeal within the period of limitation.
We, thus, condone the delay in filing the appeal. Now, we take up this appeal upon treating the same as on day's list. At the very outset, Mr. Nizumuddin, learned advocate appearing for the appellant, points out that the tax effect of the present appeal is less than 2 Rs.10 lakh and this case does not come within the exception as pointed out in CBDT Instruction No.3/11 dated 9th February, 2011.
In view of the aforesaid fact, we find that this appeal has been filed by violating the instruction issued by the CBDT, which was binding upon the appellant in view of the provisions contained in Section 268A of the Income Tax Act, 1968. We, thus, dismiss this appeal on that ground alone.
In view of the dismissal of the appeal itself, the connected application has become infructuous and the same is also disposed of accordingly.
We, however, make it clear that we have otherwise not gone into the merit of the appeal.
Urgent xerox certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties subject to compliance with all requisite formalities.
(BHATTACHARYA, J.) (DR. SAMBUDDHA CHAKRABARTI, J.) sm AR[CR]