PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4 vs. SANKET ESTATE AND FINANCE PVT LTD
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court 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 CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11th July, 2018, which mandates that no appeal with a tax effect not exceeding Rs. 50,00,000/- shall be filed before the High Court and has retrospective applicability to pending appeals, the learned senior standing counsel for the appellant (Revenue) did not press the present appeal. Consequently, the appeal was disposed of as not pressed. The court also noted that if there was any error in the computation of the tax effect or if the circular was not applicable for any reason, the appellant would be at liberty to seek revival of the appeal. No specific issue was left undecided, as the appeal was withdrawn by the appellant.
What were the facts?
This appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-4 (the Revenue) against Sanket Estate and Finance Pvt Ltd (the assessee). The assessment year(s) are not explicitly stated. The order or action under challenge is the appeal itself before the High Court. The procedural history is that the appeal was filed by the Revenue. During the hearing, it was admitted by both parties that the tax effect involved in the appeal is less than Rs. 50,00,000/-. The Revenue's counsel did not press the appeal in light of CBDT Circular No. 3/2018.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the present appeal, with a tax effect below Rs. 50,00,000/-, is maintainable before the High Court, considering CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11th July, 2018. (Question of law) Assessee's contentions: The assessee did not make any specific contentions as the appeal was not pressed by the Revenue. However, the fact that the tax effect is below the prescribed limit implies the assessee would likely rely on the circular. Revenue's contentions: The Revenue, through its learned senior standing counsel, did not press the appeal. This position was taken in light of CBDT Circular No. 3/2018, which stipulates that no appeal wherein the tax effect does not exceed Rs. 50,00,000/- shall be filed before the High Court and is retrospectively applicable to pending appeals.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
C/TAXAP/246/2016 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 246 of 2016 ========================================================== PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4 Versus SANKET ESTATE AND FINANCE PVT LTD ========================================================== Appearance: MRS MAUNA M BHATT(174) for the APPELLANT(s) No. 1 MR VIJAY S RANJAN(6126) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI and HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE A. P. THAKER
Date : 27/11/2018
ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI) 1. Heard Mrs. Mauna Bhatt, learned senior standing counsel for the appellant and Mr. Vijay Ranjan, 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/246/2016 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) Z.G. SHAIKH Page 2 of 2
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S B.K. Agency Under The Proprietor Of Bhola Prasad vs. The Chief Commissioner, CGSTPatna · 2 Nov 2026
- R.K.Service Station, Balasore vs. Commissioner CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- Tankala Soumya vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Rayagada Circle, RayagadaOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Pooja, Town Hallroad, Cuttack vs. State Tax Officer, Cuttack-I West Circle,CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Chicvogue Fashions Lip, Ganjam vs. State Tax Officer Bhubaneswar- Ii CircleOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
