COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II vs. ELECTRO FERRO ALLOYS (P) LTD

PDF · subscribers

TAXAP/1285/2011HC GujaratGJHC24045415201127 January 2020Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA2 pages

AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the Tax Appeal was not pressed by the Revenue in view of the low tax effect, having regard to Circular No. 17/2019, dated 8th August, 2019. The Court noted the revised monetary limits for appeals as per the circular, which sets a limit of ₹1,00,00,000 for appeals before the High Court. The reasoning is that the appeal falls within the scope of the circular, which mandates disposal based on low tax effect. The operative direction was to dispose of the appeal accordingly. The Court also reserved liberty for the Revenue to revive the tax appeal in case of any difficulty. No specific issue was left undecided; the appeal was disposed of on procedural grounds related to the circular.

What were the facts?

The Commissioner of Income Tax-II (the Revenue) filed a Tax Appeal before the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad against Electro Ferro Alloys (P) Ltd (the assessee). The appeal was notified for an appropriate order due to low tax effect. The Revenue sought to dispose of the appeal in light of Circular No. 17/2019, dated 8th August, 2019, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, which revised monetary limits for filing appeals. The circular specifies monetary limits for appeals before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (₹50,00,000), High Court (₹1,00,00,000), and Supreme Court (₹2,00,00,000). The appeal was disposed of based on these revised limits.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Tax Appeal should be dismissed on the grounds of low tax effect as per Circular No. 17/2019, dated 8th August, 2019? (Question of law) Assessee's Contentions: The assessee did not make any specific contentions recorded in the judgment. However, the appeal was not pressed by the Revenue in view of the low tax effect and the aforementioned circular. Revenue's Contentions: The Revenue argued that the appeal should be disposed of in light of Circular No. 17/2019, dated 8th August, 2019, due to the low tax effect. The circular provides revised monetary limits for filing appeals before various judicial forums. The appeal was not pressed by the Revenue in view of this circular.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

C/TAXAP/1285/2011 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 1285 of 2011 ========================================================== COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II Versus ELECTRO FERRO ALLOYS (P) LTD ========================================================== Appearance: MRS MAUNA M BHATT(174) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 RULE SERVED(64) for the Opponent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA

Date : 27/01/2020

ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA) 1. The Registry has notified the appeal for the purpose of passing an appropriate order. The captioned appeal has been notified because of the low tax effect. The appeal is to be disposed of keeping in mind the Circular No.17/2019, dated 8th August, 2019 issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board Direct Taxes, New Delhi. 2. This tax appeal is not pressed in view of the low tax effect having regard to the Circular No.17/2019, dated 8th August, 2019 issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board Direct Taxes, New Delhi. 3. According to the new policy as reflected from the Circular referred to above, the table for monetary limits is as follows: Page 1 of 2

C/TAXAP/1285/2011 ORDER Sr. No. Appeals/SLPs in Incometax matters Monetary Limit (Rs.) 1 Before Appellate Tribunal 50,00,000 2 Before High Court 1,00,00,000 3 Before Supreme Court 2,00,00,000 4. In view of the aforesaid, the appeal is disposed of accordingly. In case of any difficulty, we reserve the liberty for the Revenue to revive the tax appeal. (J. B. PARDIWALA, J) (BHARGAV D. KARIA, J) aruna Page 2 of 2

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →