PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 vs. KADAM EXPORTS PRIVATE LIMITED

PDF · subscribers
TAXAP/143/2015HC GujaratGJHC24047699201527 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 The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.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 of the appeal, acknowledging that human error cannot be ruled out. The court did not decide the merits of the appeal. The specific grounds for the original appeal or the ITAT's decision are not discussed as the appeal was withdrawn before any substantive hearing on the merits.

What were the facts?

This is an appeal filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 2 against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The assessee is Kadam Exports Private Limited. The appeal pertains to an assessment year not specified in the judgment. The appellant's counsel submitted a note along with a communication from the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Judicial) instructing the withdrawal of 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 the exceptional clauses of CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018. A right to revive the appeal was reserved in case of future discrepancies.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be permitted to be withdrawn by the revenue on the grounds stated in the communication from the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Judicial). The revenue, through its learned Senior Standing Counsel, argued that the appeal should be withdrawn as the tax effect was below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 and the case did not fall within any exceptional categories. They also sought liberty to revive the appeal if any discrepancies were discovered later, acknowledging the possibility of human error. The assessee's contentions are not recorded in the judgment as the rule was unserved.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
C/TAXAP/143/2015 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 143 of 2015 ========================================================== PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 Versus KADAM EXPORTS PRIVATE LIMITED ========================================================== Appearance: MRS MAUNA M BHATT(174) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1 RULE UNSERVED(68) 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 →