COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION vs. JOINT STOCK COMPANY ZANGAS

PDF · subscribers
TAXAP/163/2017HC GujaratGJHC24056820201717 December 2018Bench: HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI,HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A. P. THAKER2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal held that it is an admitted position between the parties that the tax effect involved in the appeal is less than Rs. 50,00,000/-. In light of 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 stipulates that no appeal where the tax effect does not exceed Rs. 50,00,000/- shall be filed before the High Court and is retrospectively applicable to pending appeals, the learned senior standing counsel for the appellant did not press the appeal. The appeal was accordingly disposed of as not pressed. The Tribunal 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 would be at liberty to seek revival of the appeal. No specific finding was given on the merits of the original dispute.

What were the facts?

This is an appeal filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, against an order concerning the assessment year(s) not specified in the judgment. The respondent is Joint Stock Company Zangas. The appeal is before the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad. The core of the matter is that the tax effect involved in this appeal is admitted by both parties to be less than Rs. 50,00,000/-. This fact is crucial for the subsequent procedural development of the case. The appeal was listed for hearing before the Division Bench.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal is maintainable before the High Court given the tax effect involved? (Question of law, implicitly related to the applicability of CBDT Circular No. 3/2018). The assessee (Revenue) argued that the tax effect is less than Rs. 50,00,000/-. Based on this, the learned senior standing counsel for the appellant (Revenue) did not press the present appeal. The judgment does not record any specific arguments from the respondent (assessee) regarding the merits of the case, but their counsel was present. The primary contention revolved around the monetary limit for filing appeals as per the relevant CBDT circular.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

C/TAXAP/163/2017 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 163 of 2017 ========================================================== COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION Versus JOINT STOCK COMPANY ZANGAS ========================================================== Appearance: MR.VARUN K.PATEL(3802) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1 MR MANISH J SHAH(1320) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI and HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE A. P. THAKER

Date : 17/12/2018

ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI) 1. Heard Mr.Varun Patel, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant and Mr.Manish Shah, 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. 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 Page 1 of 2

C/TAXAP/163/2017 ORDER 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) Vijay Page 2 of 2

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →