COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VALSAD vs. THEMIS MEDICARE LTD

PDF · subscribers

TAXAP/189/2015HC GujaratGJHC24047724201517 September 2018Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.N. KARIA3 pages

AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court granted the Revenue's request to withdraw the Tax Appeals. The Court reasoned that the Revenue, acting under instructions from the department, had cited a CBDT circular dated July 11, 2018. This circular provides guidelines for the department to prefer and maintain appeals before the High Court, specifying a minimum tax effect threshold. As the tax effect in the present appeals was below this stipulated limit, the Revenue was permitted to withdraw them. The Court disposed of all the Tax Appeals accordingly, without delving into the merits of the underlying tax disputes. No specific issue was left undecided; the entire set of appeals was disposed of based on the withdrawal request.

What were the facts?

The Commissioner of Income Tax I (Revenue) filed numerous Tax Appeals before the High Court of Gujarat against the assessee, Mahendra Shantilal Vyas. These appeals challenged various orders, though the specific assessment years and the nature of the orders are not detailed in this excerpt. The procedural history indicates that the Revenue sought permission to withdraw these appeals. The reason provided for withdrawal was that the tax effect involved in these appeals fell below the minimum threshold limit stipulated by the CBDT in its circular dated July 11, 2018, which governs the department's ability to prefer and maintain appeals before the High Court.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Revenue is permitted to withdraw the present Tax Appeals, given that the tax effect is below the CBDT's prescribed threshold for maintaining appeals before the High Court? (Question of law, concerning administrative policy and procedural rules). Contentions: Assessee: No contentions recorded for the assessee in this excerpt. Revenue: The Revenue, through its learned advocate, sought permission to withdraw the appeals. The basis for this request was the CBDT Circular dated July 11, 2018, which sets a minimum tax effect threshold for preferring and maintaining appeals before the High Court. The Revenue contended that the tax effect in these appeals did not meet this threshold, thus warranting withdrawal.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

C/TAXAP/1124/2014 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 1124 of 2014 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 109 of 2016 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 1216 of 2014 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 1251 of 2014 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 1385 of 2014 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 148 of 2016 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 159 of 2017 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 188 of 2015 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 189 of 2015 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 204 of 2016 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 258 of 2017 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 273 of 2017 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 275 of 2017 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 329 of 2015 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 330 of 2015 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 366 of 2015 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 390 of 2016 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 391 of 2016 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 399 of 2015 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 400 of 2015 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 435 of 2015 Page 1 of 3

C/TAXAP/1124/2014 ORDER With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 589 of 2015 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 630 of 2018 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 673 of 2018 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 692 of 2017 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 696 of 2016 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 781 of 2015 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 786 of 2015 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 876 of 2017 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 930 of 2017 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 932 of 2017 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 989 of 2011 ========================================================== COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX I Versus MAHENDRA SHANTILAL VYAS ========================================================== Appearance: MR.VARUN K.PATEL, Mrs. KALPANA RAVAL, MRS MAUNA BHATT for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1 MR RK PATEL, MR B S SOPARKAR, MR MANISH SHAH, MR TUSHAR HEMANI, MR BHAUMIK DHOLARIYA for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.N. KARIA

Date : 17/09/2018 ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI) Learned advocate for the appellant, under instructions from the department, sought permission to withdraw these appeals since the Page 2 of 3

C/TAXAP/1124/2014 ORDER tax effect involved in these appeals is below the minimum threshold limit provided by CBDT in its circular dated 11.07.2018 enabling the department to prefer and maintain appeals before the High Court. Permission is granted. Tax Appeals are disposed of accordingly. (AKIL KURESHI, J) (B.N. KARIA, J) JYOTI V. JANI Page 3 of 3

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →