PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 3 vs. GEMSTONE GLASS PVT. LTD.

PDF · subscribers

TAXAP/257/2019HC GujaratGJHC24036275201909 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 of Gujarat disposed of the tax appeal. The Court noted that the appeal was not pressed by the Revenue due to the low tax effect, in accordance with Circular No. 17/2019 dated August 8, 2019. This circular establishes monetary limits for appeals, with a limit of Rs. 1,00,00,000 for appeals before the High Court. The Court's decision to dispose of the appeal is based on the Revenue's policy of not pursuing appeals below these monetary thresholds. The Court also reserved the liberty for the Revenue to revive the tax appeal in case of any difficulty. No specific findings on the merits of the original assessment or the grounds of appeal were made as the appeal was not pressed.

What were the facts?

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 3 (Revenue) filed a tax appeal before the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad against Gemstone Glass 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. This circular outlines monetary limits for filing appeals. The appeal was not pressed by the Revenue in view of this circular and the low tax effect.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed due to low tax effect as per Circular No. 17/2019? (Question of law) Assessee's Contentions: The assessee did not present any specific contentions as the appeal was not pressed by the Revenue. However, the appeal's disposal is based on the Revenue's decision to withdraw it due to low tax effect. Revenue's Contentions: The Revenue did not press the appeal in view of the low tax effect, citing Circular No. 17/2019 dated August 8, 2019. This circular sets monetary limits for appeals before various authorities, with appeals before the High Court having a monetary limit of Rs. 1,00,00,000. The Revenue implicitly argued that the tax effect in this case fell below the prescribed limit, making it not worth pursuing.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

C/TAXAP/257/2019 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 257 of 2019 ========================================================== PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 3 Versus GEMSTONE GLASS PVT. LTD. ========================================================== Appearance: MRS MAUNA M BHATT(174) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MR SP MAJMUDAR(3456) 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/257/2019 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 →