THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - I vs. SYNPACKS
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court held that the revenue ought not to have filed the appeal as the total revenue effect was less than Rs. 1 lakh, citing CBDT Instruction No. 1979 dated 27th March, 2000 and Instruction No. 02 of 2005. The Court found that the amount involved in the present case was small. Consequently, the High Court did not entertain the appeal and dismissed it on the ground of the smallness of the amount. The questions of law were answered in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. Liberty was granted to revive the appeal in case of difficulty. The ITAT's decision to dismiss the appeal on the ground of tax effect was implicitly upheld by the High Court's reasoning.
What were the facts?
The appellant, the Commissioner of Income Tax, filed an appeal challenging an order dated 29.12.2006 passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Ahmedabad Bench. The ITAT's order pertained to ITA (SS) No. 115/Ahd/2000 and covered assessment years 1988-89 to 1998-99. The High Court admitted the appeal on 14.09.2007 and framed a substantial question of law. The dispute involves the ITAT's decision to dismiss the revenue's appeal without adjudicating on merits, citing CBDT instructions regarding tax effect.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in dismissing the appeal filed by the Revenue without adjudicating the same on merits on the ground that since in the appeal, tax effect was below Rs. 2 lakh, the revenue could not have preferred the same in view of the instructions of the CBDT, thereby entitling the Hon’ble Tribunal not to decide the same on merits? Assessee's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the assessee. Revenue's Contention: The revenue contended that the ITAT erred in dismissing their appeal without deciding it on merits, solely based on the tax effect being below Rs. 2 lakh, as per CBDT instructions. The revenue implicitly argued that the merits of the appeal should have been considered.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
O/TAXAP/1148/2007 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD TAX APPEAL NO. 1148 of 2007
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.J.THAKER ================================================================ 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ================================================================ THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - I....Appellant(s) Versus SYNPACKS....Opponent(s) ================================================================ Appearance: MR KM PARIKH, ADVOCATE for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MRS SWATI SOPARKAR, ADVOCATE for the Opponent(s) No. 1 ================================================================ CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.J.THAKER
Date : 22/12/2014
Page 1 of 3
O/TAXAP/1148/2007 JUDGMENT ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI) 1. By way of this appeal, the appellant-revenue has challenged the order dated 29.12.2006 passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench in ITA (SS) No. 115/Ahd/2000 for the assessment year 1988-89 to 1998-99. 2. While admitting this appeal on 14.09.2007, this Court has framed the following substantial question of law: (A) Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in dismissing the appeal filed by the Revenue without adjudicating the same on merits on the ground that since in the appeal, tax effect was below Rs. 2 lakh, the revenue could not have preferred the same in view of the instructions of the CBDT, thereby entitling the Hon’ble Tribunal not to decide the same on merits? 3. In our view, the amount involved in the present case is a small one and the revenue effect is less than Rs. 1 lakh, and therefore, as per CDBT Instruction No. 1979 dated 27th March, 2000 and 02 of 2005, the revenue ought not to have come in appeal where the total revenue effect is less than Rs. 1 lakh, and therefore, this appeal is not entertained. The questions are answered in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. This appeal is dismissed on the ground of smallness of amount. Liberty to revive in case of difficulty. Page 2 of 3
O/TAXAP/1148/2007 JUDGMENT (K.S.JHAVERI, J.) (K.J.THAKER, J) divya Page 3 of 3
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- R.K.Service Station, Balasore vs. Commissioner CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- Tankala Soumya vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Rayagada Circle, RayagadaOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Pooja, Town Hallroad, Cuttack vs. State Tax Officer, Cuttack-I West Circle,CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Chicvogue Fashions Lip, Ganjam vs. State Tax Officer Bhubaneswar- Ii CircleOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Priya, Townhall Road, Cuttack vs. Superintendent Cuttack- I Range, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
