Bombay H.C : Shri Shivram, learned counsel for the respondent assessee, has been heard.

High Court Of Bombay

Commissioner Of Wealth Tax vs. Executors Of Late Shri D.T. Udeshi

Section WT 27

Asst. Year 1973-74, 1974-75, 1975-76, 1976-77, 1977-78, 1978-79

T.D. Sugla & B.N. Srikrishna, JJ.

WT Appln. No. 184 of 1988

25th March, 1991

Counsel Appeared

Jetley with P.S. Jetley & K.C. Sidhwa, for the Revenue : K. Shivram, for the Assessee

D. SUGLA, J.:

Shri Shivram, learned counsel for the respondent assessee, has been heard. He has pointed out that the tax effect, if the Department succeeds, is going to be of Rs. 37,381 for as many as six assessment years, i.e., from the asst. yr. 1973-74 to the asst. yr. 1978-79. The tax effect in no year exceeds Rs. 8,500. Referring then to Instruction No. 1573 issued by the CBDT, vide Circular F. No. 279/26/83-ITJ dt.12th July, 1984, and Instruction No. 1764 issued by the CBDT, vide Circular F. No. 319/11/ 87-WT dt. 14th July, 1987, he submitted that, in a case where the tax effect is less than Rs. 30,000, the Board has taken a policy decision not to raise questions of law with a view to reduce litigations before High Courts and the Supreme Court. He has also referred to another instruction being Instruction No. 1569 dt. 3rd July, 1984, issued by the Board which was noted in a Tribunal’s decision dt. 26th Nov., 1986 (copy of the order placed on record), which instruction he was not able to produce. On going through all these instructions, we are satisfied that the Board has taken a policy decision not to file references in cases where the tax effect is going to be less than Rs. 30,000 per year. That being so, we discharge the rule.

2. Rule discharged. No order as to costs.

[Citation : 189 ITR 319]

Malcare WordPress Security