THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III vs. SUDIPTA M BHAUMICK

PDF · subscribers
TAXAP/1421/2008HC GujaratGJHC24041314200811 February 2019Bench: HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI,HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A. P. THAKER2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the appeal is not pressed by the appellant (Revenue). This decision is based on the admitted fact that the tax effect involved in the appeal is less than Rs. 50,00,000/-. The Court took into account Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11th July, 2018, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. This circular stipulates that no appeal with a tax effect not exceeding Rs. 50,00,000/- shall be filed before the High Court and has been made retrospectively applicable to pending appeals. Consequently, the learned senior standing counsel for the appellant stated that the appeal is not pressed. The appeal is disposed of as not pressed in light of the aforementioned circular. The Court also noted that if there is any error in the computation of the tax effect or if the circular is not applicable for any reason, the appellant can seek revival of the appeal.

What were the facts?

This is an appeal filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax-III (the Revenue) against the respondent, Sudipta M Bhaumick. The appeal challenges an order from the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The assessment year(s) are not explicitly stated in the provided text. The core of the matter is the tax effect involved in the appeal. Both parties acknowledge that the tax effect is less than Rs. 50,00,000/-. This fact is crucial for the subsequent proceedings and the final decision.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be entertained by the High Court given the tax effect is less than Rs. 50,00,000/-. The Revenue's contention, as presented by Mrs. Mauna Bhatt, is that the appeal is not pressed due to the tax effect being below the monetary limit stipulated in Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11th July, 2018. The Revenue relies on this circular, which mandates that appeals with a tax effect not exceeding Rs. 50,00,000/- should not be filed before the High Court and is retrospectively applicable to pending appeals. The respondent's counsel, Mrs. Swati Soparkar, is present but no specific arguments are recorded for the respondent beyond the acknowledgment of the tax effect.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

C/TAXAP/1421/2008 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 1421 of 2008 ================================================================ THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III Versus SUDIPTA M BHAUMICK ================================================================ Appearance: MRS MAUNA M BHATT(174) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1 MRS SWATI SOPARKAR(870) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1 ================================================================ CORAM: HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI and HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE A. P. THAKER

Date : 11/02/2019 ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI) 1. Heard Mrs. Mauna Bhatt, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant and Mrs. Swati Soparkar, learned advocate for the respondent. 2. It is an admitted position between the parties that the tax effect involved in this appeal is less than Rs.50,00,000/-. Under the circumstances, in the light of the Circular No.3/2018 dated 11th July, 2018 issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Direct Taxes which provides that no appeal wherein the tax effect does not exceed the monetary limit of Rs.50,00,000/- shall be filed before the High Court and has also been made retrospectively applicable to pending appeals, the learned senior standing counsel for the appellant does not press the present appeal. Page 1 of 2

C/TAXAP/1421/2008 ORDER 3. The appeal is accordingly disposed of as not pressed in the light of the Circular dated 11th July, 2018. However, in case there is any error in the computation of the tax effect involved or if for any reason, the circular is not applicable, it would be open for the appellant to seek revival of the appeal. (HARSHA DEVANI, J) (A. P. THAKER, J) R.S. MALEK Page 2 of 2

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →