PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2 vs. GUJARAT AMBUJA PROTEIN LTD.

PDF · subscribers
TAXAP/207/2017HC GujaratGJHC24056856201727 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 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 The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.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 decision to withdraw was based on the tax effect being below the monetary limit prescribed by the CBDT and the case not meeting the criteria for exceptions. No decision on the merits of the original appeal was made.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2 against Gujarat Ambuja Protein 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 indicated instructions to withdraw the appeal because 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 appellant sought to reserve the right to revive the appeal if any discrepancy was discovered later.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be withdrawn as per the instructions of the CBDT Circular No. 3/2018, considering the tax effect is below the monetary limit. (Question of fact and procedure) The assessee (Revenue) argued for the withdrawal of the appeal. The assessee's counsel submitted a note and a communication from the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Judicial) instructing withdrawal due to the tax effect being below the monetary limit specified in CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 and the case not falling under any exceptional clauses. The assessee sought permission to withdraw the appeal with liberty to revive it if discrepancies arise later.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
C/TAXAP/207/2017 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 207 of 2017 ========================================================== PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2 Versus GUJARAT AMBUJA PROTEIN LTD. ========================================================== Appearance: MRS MAUNA M BHATT(174) for the PETITIONER(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 →