COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX I vs. MAHENDRA SHANTILAL VYAS

PDF · subscribers
TAXAP/1124/2014HC GujaratGJHC24045207201417 September 2018Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.N. KARIA3 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad, per the oral order of Justices Akil Kureshi and B.N. Karia, granted permission to the appellant (Revenue) to withdraw the Tax Appeals. The Revenue's submission was that the tax effect in these appeals fell below the threshold limit stipulated by the CBDT in its circular dated 11.07.2018, which governs the department's ability to file and maintain appeals before the High Court. The Court accepted this submission and disposed of the Tax Appeals accordingly. No decision was made on the merits of the underlying tax disputes. The ratio decidendi is that appeals can be withdrawn by the Revenue if they do not meet the monetary limits prescribed by CBDT circulars for maintaining such appeals.

What were the facts?

The Commissioner of Income Tax I (Revenue) filed numerous Tax Appeals before the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad against the assessee, Mahendra Shantilal Vyas. These appeals challenged various orders passed by lower authorities. The appeals were filed across several years, including 2011, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, and 2018. The specific assessment years and the amounts in dispute are not detailed in this excerpt. The procedural history leading to these appeals before the High Court is not elaborated upon, other than the fact that they were filed by the Revenue.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Revenue is permitted to withdraw the present Tax Appeals. This question arises from the Revenue's submission to withdraw the appeals. The Revenue's contention is that the tax effect involved in these appeals is below the minimum threshold limit provided by CBDT Circular dated 11.07.2018, which enables the department to prefer and maintain appeals before the High Court. The assessee's arguments are not recorded in this excerpt. The issue hinges on the interpretation and applicability of the aforementioned CBDT circular.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

C/TAXAP/1124/2014 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 1124 of 2014 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 109 of 2016 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 1216 of 2014 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 1251 of 2014 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 1385 of 2014 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 148 of 2016 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 159 of 2017 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 188 of 2015 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 189 of 2015 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 204 of 2016 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 258 of 2017 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 273 of 2017 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 275 of 2017 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 329 of 2015 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 330 of 2015 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 366 of 2015 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 390 of 2016 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 391 of 2016 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 399 of 2015 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 400 of 2015 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 435 of 2015 Page 1 of 3

C/TAXAP/1124/2014 ORDER With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 589 of 2015 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 630 of 2018 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 673 of 2018 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 692 of 2017 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 696 of 2016 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 781 of 2015 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 786 of 2015 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 876 of 2017 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 930 of 2017 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 932 of 2017 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 989 of 2011 ========================================================== COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX I Versus MAHENDRA SHANTILAL VYAS ========================================================== Appearance: MR.VARUN K.PATEL, Mrs. KALPANA RAVAL, MRS MAUNA BHATT for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1 MR RK PATEL, MR B S SOPARKAR, MR MANISH SHAH, MR TUSHAR HEMANI, MR BHAUMIK DHOLARIYA for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.N. KARIA

Date : 17/09/2018 ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI) Learned advocate for the appellant, under instructions from the department, sought permission to withdraw these appeals since the Page 2 of 3

C/TAXAP/1124/2014 ORDER tax effect involved in these appeals is below the minimum threshold limit provided by CBDT in its circular dated 11.07.2018 enabling the department to prefer and maintain appeals before the High Court. Permission is granted. Tax Appeals are disposed of accordingly. (AKIL KURESHI, J) (B.N. KARIA, J) JYOTI V. JANI Page 3 of 3

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →