PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2 vs. S K DIST. CENTRAL CO OP BANK LTD

PDF · subscribers
TAXAP/554/2016HC GujaratGJHC24051847201627 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 to withdraw the appeal as prayed for by the Revenue. The appeal was accordingly dismissed as withdrawn.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, acknowledging that human error cannot be ruled out. The specific findings on the merits of the case are not discussed as the appeal was withdrawn. The ratio decidendi is that appeals with a tax effect below the prescribed monetary limits, and not falling under exceptional categories, can be withdrawn by the Revenue as per CBDT instructions, with liberty to revive if errors are found.

What were the facts?

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2 filed a Tax Appeal before the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad against an order concerning the assessment year(s) not specified. The appeal was filed by the Revenue against the assessee, S K Dist. Central Co Op Bank Ltd. The appeal was listed for hearing. The Revenue'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 exceptional clauses of CBDT Circular No. 3/2018.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be withdrawn by the Revenue on the grounds that the tax effect is below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 and the case does not fall within the exceptional clauses. The Revenue argued that the appeal should be withdrawn as per the instructions received, citing the low tax effect and non-applicability of exceptional clauses under CBDT Circular No. 3/2018. The Revenue also reserved a right to revive the appeal in case of any discrepancy discovered later, acknowledging the possibility of 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
C/TAXAP/554/2016 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 554 of 2016 ========================================================== PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2 Versus S K DIST. CENTRAL CO OP BANK LTD ========================================================== Appearance: MRS MAUNA M BHATT(174) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1 MUNJAAL M BHATT(8283) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1 MR MANISH J SHAH(1320) 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 →