https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212506 HC held Instruction No.3/11 applicable to pending appeals, finding it more beneficial than Instruction No.2/05 and that prospective application would be discriminatory. Treating the instruction as retrospective would conserve court time, advance National Litigation Policy goals, and not leave parties disadvantaged by timing. Appeal was dismissed because the tax effect was below the Rs 10 lakh threshold; no opinion was expressed on the merits of the underlying claim. en-us Wed, 02 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 20 Aug 2025 11:23:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212506 HC held Instruction No.3/11 applicable to pending appeals, finding it more beneficial than Instruction No.2/05 and that prospective application would be discriminatory. Treating the instruction as retrospective would conserve court time, advance National Litigation Policy goals, and not leave parties disadvantaged by timing. Appeal was dismissed because the tax effect was below the Rs 10 lakh threshold; no opinion was expressed on the merits of the underlying claim. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 02 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212506