THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, HYD vs M/S. NATIONLA MINERAL DEVLP.LTD., HYD

2026:JHHC:6815-DB

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

Tax Appeal No. 24 of 2017 The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Central Revenue Building, Bir Chand Patel Marg, P.O.- G.P.O., P.S. Kotwali, District: Patna.

… … … Appellant

Versus M/S Mishrilall Jain & Sons, having its Office at M. D. House, Chaibasa, P.O. & P.S.- Chaibasa, District: Singhbhum West. … … … Respondent

With Tax Appeal No. 22 of 2017 The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Central Revenue Building, Bir Chand Patel Marg, P.O.- G.P.O., P.S. Kotwali, District: Patna.

… … … Appellant

Versus M/S Mishrilall Jain & Sons, having its Office at M. D. House, Chaibasa, P.O. & P.S.- Chaibasa, District: Singhbhum West. … … … Respondent

With Tax Appeal No. 23 of 2017 The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Central Revenue Building, Bir Chand Patel Marg, P.O.- G.P.O., P.S. Kotwali, District: Patna-800001. … … … Appellant

Versus M/S Mishrilall Jain & Sons, having its Office at M. D. House, Chaibasa, P.O. & P.S.- Chaibasa, District: Singhbhum West. … … … Respondent

--------- CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY

--------- For the Appellants: Mr. Kumar Vaibhav, Sr. S.C. (through VC)

Mr. Anurag Vijay, Jr. S.C.

Mr. Durgesh Agarwal, Advocate

Mr. Vishwajeet Singh, Advocate For the Respondent: Mrs. Darshana Poddar Mishra, Advocate Mr. Mahendra Kumar Chowdhary, Advocate --------- 14/Dated: 13.03.2026

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2026:JHHC:6815-DB

-2-

The tax effect in these appeals is admittedly below Rs. 2 crores. However, Mr. Kumar Vaibhav, learned counsel for the appellant/s, states that he has no instructions to withdraw these appeals. 3. Accordingly, we dispose of these appeals on the grounds of low tax effect by keeping open the questions of law. 4. However, at the later stage, if the appellant/s finds that the matter is covered by any of the exceptions in the CBDT circulars, liberty is granted to them to apply for restoration of these appeals by filing C.M.P. Such C.M.P. should however, be filed within a reasonable period not exceeding three months from today. 5. The appeals are disposed of with liberty in the above terms. No Costs. 6. Pending Interlocutory Applications, if any, do not survive and are disposed of.

(M.S. Sonak, C.J.)

(Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.)

March 13, 2026

N.A.F.R. APK/VK

Uploaded on 16.03.2026

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, HYD vs. M/S. NATIONLA MINERAL DEVLP.LTD., HYD