COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II vs. G M M P FAULDER LTD

PDF · subscribers
TAXAP/1092/2011HC GujaratGJHC24045343201127 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 the appellant (Revenue) to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was accordingly dismissed as withdrawn. The court also granted liberty to the appellant to revive the appeal in case any discrepancy came to notice at a later stage after withdrawal, acknowledging that human error cannot be ruled out. No decision was made on the merits of the case. The reasoning for the withdrawal was solely based on the instructions from the Revenue's higher authorities due to the tax effect being below the prescribed monetary limit and the absence of exceptional circumstances as per CBDT Circular No.3/2018.

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) instructing her 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 Whether the appeal should be withdrawn by the Revenue on the grounds of tax effect being below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No.3/2018. Assessee's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the assessee's side regarding the issues to be decided. The assessee is the respondent in this appeal. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue, through its learned Senior Standing Counsel, sought to withdraw the appeal. The primary argument for withdrawal was based on CBDT Circular No.3/2018, which stipulates a monetary limit for filing appeals. The tax effect in this case was below the threshold of Rs.50,00,000/-, and the case did not qualify for any exceptions mentioned in the circular. The Revenue also sought liberty to revive the appeal if any discrepancies were discovered later, acknowledging the possibility of human error.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
C/TAXAP/1092/2011 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 1092 of 2011 ================================================================ COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II Versus G M M P FAULDER LTD ================================================================ Appearance: MRS MAUNA M BHATT(174) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1 MR B S SOPARKAR(6851) 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) R.S. MALEK

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →