COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II vs. G M M P FAULDER LTD
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court granted the permission as prayed for by the appellant. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn. The Court also granted liberty to the appellant 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 primary decision was to allow the withdrawal of the appeal based on the stated grounds and the CBDT circular, without delving into the merits of the original tax dispute. No specific issue was decided on merits; the appeal was disposed of procedurally.
What were the facts?
The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax-II against G M M P FAULDER LTD. The appeal was filed before the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad. The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant 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/- as per CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018, and the case did not fall under any exceptional clauses. The appellant reserved the right to revive the appeal if any discrepancy was found later.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the appeal should be permitted to be withdrawn by the appellant, the Commissioner of Income Tax-II, based on the CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 and the tax effect being below the monetary limit. The Revenue, through its learned Senior Standing Counsel, argued that the appeal should be withdrawn as per the instructions received from the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Judicial). This instruction was based on the CBDT Circular No. 3/2018, which stipulates a monetary limit for filing appeals, and the tax effect in this case was below that limit. The Revenue also stated that the case did not fall under any exceptional clauses mentioned in the circular. The Revenue sought permission to withdraw the appeal, reserving a right to revive it if any discrepancies were discovered later due to potential human error. The Assessee's contentions are not recorded in the judgment.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI)
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.
Permission as prayed for is granted. The appeal is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as aforesaid. (HARSHA DEVANI, J) (A. P. THAKER, J) R.S. MALEK
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dwaraka Jewellers, Bhubaneswar vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S N D Waddar And Co vs. Sri Gaurav GuptaKarnataka · 30 Oct 2026
- Kanwar Enterprises Private Limited vs. The Joint Commissioner - State TaxTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Bangi Mines And Minerals vs. The State Of TelanganaTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Arka Business Solutions vs. Principal Commissioner Of CustomsTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
