PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-VADODARA-1 vs. MAYUR ROADWAYS

PDF · subscribers
TAXAP/375/2016HC GujaratGJHC24051760201601 October 2019Bench: HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI,HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SANGEETA K. VISHEN2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal held that the appeal is disposed of as not pressed. This decision was based on the submission by the Revenue's counsel that the tax effect involved in the appeal was less than Rs. 1,00,00,000/-. Consequently, in light of Circular No. 17 of 2019, which prohibits filing appeals with a tax effect below this monetary limit and is applicable retrospectively, the Revenue did not press the appeal. The operative direction is that the appeal is disposed of as not pressed. The judgment also notes that if there is any error in the computation of the tax effect or if the circular is 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 No specific issue was left undecided, as the appeal was withdrawn.

What were the facts?

This case involves an appeal filed by the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-Vadodara-1 (the Revenue) against Mayur Roadways (the Assessee). The appeal was before the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad. The Revenue's counsel stated that the tax effect in the appeal was less than Rs. 1,00,00,000/-. This was in the context of Circular No. 17 of 2019, issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Direct Taxes, which stipulated that no appeal with a tax effect not exceeding Rs. 1,00,00,000/- should be filed before the High Court. This circular was also made retrospectively applicable to pending appeals.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the present appeal, with a tax effect below the monetary limit specified in Circular No. 17 of 2019, is maintainable before the High Court? (Question of law) The Revenue argued that in light of Circular No. 17 of 2019, which mandates that appeals with a tax effect not exceeding Rs. 1,00,00,000/- should not be filed before the High Court and is applicable retrospectively to pending appeals, the present appeal should not be pressed. The Assessee's arguments are not recorded in the judgment.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

C/TAXAP/375/2016 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 375 of 2016 ========================================================== PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-VADODARA-1 Versus MAYUR ROADWAYS ========================================================== Appearance: MR KM PARIKH(575) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MR.VARUN K.PATEL(3802) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MR B S SOPARKAR(6851) for the Opponent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI and HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SANGEETA K. VISHEN

Date : 01/10/2019 ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI) 1. Heard Mr.Varun K. Patel, learned senior standing counsel for the appellant and Mr.B.S. Soparkar, learned advocate for the respondent. 2. Mr. Varun K. Patel, learned senior standing counsel for the appellant, has stated that the tax effect involved in this appeal is less than Rs.1,00,00,000/-. Under the circumstances, in the light of the Circular No.17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019 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.1,00,00,000/- shall be filed before the High Court and which Page 1 of 2

C/TAXAP/375/2016 ORDER has also been made retrospectively applicable to pending appeals, the learned senior standing counsel for the appellant does not press the present appeal. 3. The appeal is, accordingly, disposed of as not pressed in light of the Circular dated 08.08.2019. 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) (SANGEETA K. VISHEN,J) RAVI P. PATEL Page 2 of 2

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →