COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II vs. CHANDRAKANT RAMNALAL PATEL

PDF · subscribers

TAXAP/648/2011HC GujaratGJHC24045108201127 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 appellant. The appeal was accordingly dismissed as withdrawn.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. No decision was made on the merits of the case. The specific assessment year(s) and the amount in dispute were not recorded in the judgment.

What were the facts?

The appellant, Commissioner of Income Tax-II, filed a Tax Appeal before the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad. The appeal was against an order or action concerning the respondent, Chandrakant Ramnalal Patel. The appeal was filed for assessment year(s) not specified in the judgment. The procedural history leading to this hearing is that the appellant's 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.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be withdrawn based on the tax effect being below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 3/2018, and not falling under any exceptional clauses. The assessee did not make any arguments as the appeal was withdrawn by the revenue. The revenue, through its counsel, argued that the appeal should be withdrawn. This was based on a communication from the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Judicial) dated 29.10.2018. The grounds for withdrawal were 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 within the exceptional clauses mentioned in the circular. The revenue also reserved a right to revive the appeal if any discrepancy was discovered later.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

C/TAXAP/648/2011 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 648 of 2011 ================================================================ COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II Versus CHANDRAKANT RAMNALAL PATEL ================================================================ Appearance: MRS MAUNA M BHATT(174) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1 BHOOMI M THAKORE(6237) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1 MS NISHA M THAKORE(3293) 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)

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 →