COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX I vs. CADILA PHARMACEUTICALS LTD

PDF · subscribers
TAXAP/39/2015HC GujaratGJHC24047666201507 January 2022Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA,HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the Tax Appeal was not pressed by the Revenue due to its low tax effect, in accordance with Circular No. 17/2019 dated August 8, 2019. This circular establishes monetary limits for appeals before different judicial forums, with appeals before the High Court having a monetary limit of Rs. 1,00,00,000. Since the appeal fell within the scope of this policy, it was disposed of accordingly. The court reserved the liberty for the Revenue to revive the tax appeal in case of any difficulty. No specific finding on the merits of the original dispute was made, as the appeal was not pressed.

What were the facts?

This matter concerns a Tax Appeal filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax I against Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd. The appeal was listed for an appropriate order by the Registry. The appeal was notified due to its low tax effect, and the court was to consider Circular No. 17/2019 dated August 8, 2019, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. The circular outlines monetary limits for filing appeals before various authorities. The appeal was ultimately disposed of based on this circular and the fact that it was not pressed.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed due to low tax effect, in light of Circular No. 17/2019? Assessee's contention: The assessee (implicitly, as the appeal is not pressed) would likely rely on the Circular No. 17/2019 to argue for the dismissal of the appeal due to the low tax effect, aligning with the policy set by the CBDT. Revenue's contention: The revenue, as the appellant, would typically argue for the merits of the appeal. However, in this specific instance, the revenue is not pressing the appeal, indicating an acceptance of the policy outlined in Circular No. 17/2019, which sets monetary limits for appeals. The judgment explicitly states the appeal is 'not pressed in view of the low tax effect having regard to the Circular No.17/2019'.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

C/TAXAP/39/2015 ORDER DATED: 07/01/2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 39 of 2015 ========================================================== COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX I Versus CADILA PHARMACEUTICALS LTD ========================================================== Appearance: MR MANISH R. BHATT, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR M R BHATT & CO. (5953) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MR B S SOPARKAR(6851) for the Opponent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA and HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE

Date : 07/01/2022

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 8 th 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 8 th 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/39/2015 ORDER DATED: 07/01/2022 Sr. No. Appeals/SLPs in Income-tax 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) (NISHA M. THAKORE,J) A. B. VAGHELA Page 2 of 2

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →