PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL AHMEDABAD vs. JAYESH STEEL PVT. LTD.

PDF · subscribers

TAXAP/225/2019HC GujaratGJHC24031487201909 September 2019Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.C. RAO2 pages

AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court decided that the appeal should be disposed of in accordance with Circular No. 17/2019, dated August 8, 2019. The appeal was not pressed by the Revenue due to a low tax effect, which falls below the monetary limit prescribed for appeals before the High Court (Rs. 1,00,00,000) as per the said circular. The Court noted the new policy reflected in the circular and disposed of the appeal accordingly. The Court also reserved the liberty for the Revenue to revive the tax appeal in case of any difficulty. The ratio decidendi is that appeals with a tax effect below the stipulated monetary limits in the CBDT circulars are not to be pressed, leading to their disposal.

What were the facts?

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Ahmedabad (Revenue) filed a tax appeal before the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad against Jayesh Steel Pvt. Ltd. (assessee). The appeal was notified for an appropriate order due to a low tax effect. The appeal was to be disposed of in light of Circular No. 17/2019, dated August 8, 2019, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, which outlines monetary limits for filing appeals. The circular specifies a monetary limit of Rs. 1,00,00,000 for appeals before the High Court.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed due to a low tax effect, as per Circular No. 17/2019? (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 policy outlined in Circular No. 17/2019. The judgment refers to the circular which sets monetary limits for appeals, implying the tax effect in this case was below the threshold for High Court appeals. Revenue's contentions: The Revenue did not press the appeal. The judgment explicitly states that the appeal is not pressed in view of the low tax effect and Circular No. 17/2019. The Revenue relied on the policy outlined in the circular for not pursuing the appeal.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

C/TAXAP/225/2019 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 225 of 2019 ========================================================== PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL AHMEDABAD Versus JAYESH STEEL PVT. LTD. ========================================================== Appearance: MRS MAUNA M BHATT(174) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MRS SWATI SOPARKAR(870) for the Opponent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.C. RAO

Date : 09/09/2019

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/225/2019 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) (A. C. RAO, J) aruna Page 2 of 2

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →