HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA · SOURCE-REVIEWED PROCEDURAL ORDER
Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Shillong v. Dhar Construction Company
ITA No. 3 of 2024 ·
2024:MLHC:1027-DB
Revenue counsel stated on instructions that tax effect fell below the ceiling and the client proposed not to proceed. Appeal dismissed as withdrawn.
Division Bench · I. P. Mukerji · W. Diengdoh
1. Facts of the case
Revenue had appealed against Dhar Construction Company. Counsel stated on instructions that Revenue proposed not to proceed because the tax effect involved was below the ceiling.
2. Discussion by the Hon’ble Court
The Court recorded Revenue’s instructions and the low-tax-effect reason for not proceeding. The order does not identify the ceiling amount, circular number, assessment year or underlying tax issue, and contains no merits examination.
3. Judicial decision
The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
4. Outcome / in whose favour
Revenue’s appeal ended by withdrawal. This is a procedural disposal, not a merits affirmation of any stated tax proposition or an adjudicated determination of the monetary threshold.
5. AKHB REVIEW POINT
Do not cite a low-tax-effect withdrawal as a substantive tax precedent. Preserve this distinct November order separately from the same-party March condonation application: different dates, dockets, benches and operative outcomes prevent treating them as duplicates; the supplied orders alone do not prove their docket linkage.
Source and verification
Complete supplied order, 1 page(s). Every page read and visually inspected. No assessment year or PAN is stated. Referenced applications, earlier orders and subsequent compliance are not included unless expressly identified.
Source SHA-256: 69ed444ad402b5691bbcefaef1fcd91b282881f224bd88ac2972c77035b5dfd5
Only provisions expressly identified in this order are recorded. No substantive tax merits or current statutory equivalence is inferred.
Source checked 2026-10-18. Later proceedings, compliance and current precedential treatment have not been comprehensively verified.
AI disclosure and professional disclaimer
This AKHB research note was prepared with AI assistance from an identified primary report. Independent human review is not represented.
General legal and tax research only; not legal or tax advice. Verify the complete judgment, applicable statutory version and subsequent treatment before reliance. The AKHB REVIEW POINT is editorial analysis, not the Court’s holding. No current-law clearance is claimed.