COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. STATE BANK OF SAURASHTRA
What did the High Court hold?
The Gujarat High Court held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were required to be dismissed. This decision was based on the minutes of the meeting of the Committee on Disputes held on June 7, 2007. The Committee on Disputes had not granted permission to the department to pursue the matter. Consequently, the Court dismissed all the appeals. The reasoning is that once the Committee on Disputes, which has the authority in such matters, does not permit the Revenue to proceed, the appeals cannot be sustained. The ratio decidendi is that if a statutory committee tasked with overseeing certain disputes denies permission to pursue an appeal, the appellate court must dismiss the appeal. The operative direction was the dismissal of all the appeals. No issue was expressly left undecided.
What were the facts?
The Revenue (Commissioner of Income Tax) filed these Tax Appeals under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Years 1992-93 to 1997-98. The appeals were admitted by the Gujarat High Court on September 19, 2006. However, it was later revealed that the issue was pending before the Committee on Disputes. A minutes of the Committee's meeting held on June 7, 2007, was placed before the Court. Following this, the Court passed an order on June 20, 2008, granting the learned Standing Counsel time to seek instructions. Subsequently, instructions were received, indicating that the Committee on Disputes had not granted permission to the department to pursue the matter. Therefore, the appeals were required to be dismissed.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the appeals filed by the Revenue are maintainable in light of the decision of the Committee on Disputes regarding the pending issue? (Question of law) Assessee's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the assessee (State Bank of Saurashtra) regarding the maintainability of the appeals or the decision of the Committee on Disputes. The dismissal appears to be based on the Revenue's inability to proceed. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue's contention, as implied by the outcome, is that they sought to pursue the appeals. However, their ability to do so was curtailed by the decision of the Committee on Disputes, which did not grant permission to proceed with the matter. The Revenue relied on the minutes of the Committee on Disputes dated 07.06.2007.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
TAXAP/1849/2005 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD TAX APPEAL No. 1849 of 2005 To TAX APPEAL No. 1854 of 2005 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ Sd/- HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BANKIM.N.MEHTA Sd/- ==================================== 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? YES 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not ? NO 3. Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? NO 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 ? NO 5. Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? NO ==================================== COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - Appellant Versus STATE BANK OF SAURASHTRA - Opponent ====================================
TAXAP/1849/2005 2/3 JUDGMENT Appearance : MR MANISH R BHATT for Appellant. MR RK PATEL for Opponent. ==================================== CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BANKIM.N.MEHTA Date : 01/08/2008 COMMON ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ) 1. The revenue has filed these Tax Appeals under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for A.Y. 1992 – 93 to 1997 – 98. All these appeals are admitted by this Court on 19.09.2006. However, at the time of admission of these appeals, it was not pointed out to the Court that the issue is pending before the Committee on Disputes. A minutes of the meeting of the Committee on Disputes held on 07.06.2007 was placed on the record of this Court and on the basis of that, this Court has passed an order on 20.06.2008. The learned Standing Counsel had sought for time to seek necessary instructions from the department. Now, instructions have been received and since the Committee on Disputes has not granted permission to the department to pursue the matter, the said appeals
TAXAP/1849/2005 3/3 JUDGMENT are required to be dismissed. As a matter of fact, earlier also, the appeals were dismissed being Tax Appeal Nos. 1654, 1655 & 224 of 2006 vide order dated 13.12.2007. 2. In light of the minutes dated 07.06.2007, all these appeals stand dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- [K. A. PUJ, J.] [B. N. MEHTA, J.] Savariya
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Manoj Kumar Prop M K Steel Traders vs. Additional Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Rohit Medical Systems vs. Commissioner Of Delhi Goods And Services Tax And Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Manoj Kumar Prop M K Steel Traders vs. Additional Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Shivam Kumar vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Rajkalpana Travels PVT. LTD. vs. Commissioner CGST, Delhi North CommissionerateDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
