THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2 vs. GUJARAT MINERAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD

PDF · subscribers
TAXAP/600/2015HC GujaratGJHC24047901201527 November 2018Author: HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI,HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A. P. THAKER1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court granted permission as prayed for by the Revenue. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn. The Court also granted liberty to the Revenue to revive the appeal in case any discrepancy comes to notice at a later stage after the withdrawal, acknowledging that human error cannot be ruled out. The Court did not decide the merits of the appeal. The specific monetary limit of Rs. 50,00,000/- and the CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 were the basis for the withdrawal request and its acceptance.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2 against Gujarat Mineral Development Corporation Ltd. The appeal was admitted by the High Court of Gujarat. The Revenue, through its learned Senior Standing Counsel, submitted a note along with a communication from the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Judicial). This communication instructed the counsel to withdraw the appeal. The reason for withdrawal was that the tax effect was below the monetary limit of Rs. 50,00,000/- and the case did not fall under any exceptional clauses as per CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018. The Revenue reserved a right to revive the appeal if any discrepancy was discovered later, acknowledging the possibility of human error.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be permitted to be withdrawn by the Revenue on the ground that the tax effect is below the monetary limit prescribed by the CBDT circular, and the case does not fall under any exceptional clauses. Assessee's Contentions: Not recorded. Revenue's Contentions: The Revenue, through its counsel, submitted a note and a communication from the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Judicial) instructing the withdrawal of the appeal. The grounds for withdrawal were that the tax effect was below the monetary limit of Rs. 50,00,000/- and the case did not fall within the exceptional clauses as per CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018. The Revenue also sought liberty to revive the appeal in case of any future discrepancy.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
C/TAXAP/600/2015 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 600 of 2015 ========================================================== THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2 Versus GUJARAT MINERAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD ========================================================== Appearance: MRS MAUNA M BHATT(174) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1 MR B S SOPARKAR(6851) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1 RULE SERVED(64) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI and HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE A. P. THAKER Date : 27/11/2018

ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI)

1.

Ms. Mauna Bhatt, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant has submitted a note together with a communication dated 29.10.2018 of the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Judicial), for Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Gujarat, Ahmedabad, instructing her to withdraw the appeal as the tax effect is below the monetary limit of Rs.50,00,000/- and the case does not fall in the exceptional clauses as per the CBDT Circular No.3/2018 dated 11.07.2018, reserving a right to revive the appeal in case any discrepancy comes to notice at a later stage after withdrawal of the appeal as human error cannot be ruled out.

2.

Permission as prayed for is granted. The appeal is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as aforesaid. (HARSHA DEVANI, J) (A. P. THAKER, J) Vijay

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →