COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. GAYATRI CRANE SERVICES PVT LTD

PDF · subscribers
TAXAP/417/2013HC GujaratGJHC24043378201327 November 2018Bench: HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI,HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A. P. THAKER2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that since it was an admitted position that the tax effect involved in the appeal was less than Rs. 50,00,000/-, and in light of Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11th July, 2018, which mandates that no appeal with a tax effect not exceeding this monetary limit shall be filed before the High Court and has retrospective applicability, the learned senior standing counsel for the appellant (Revenue) did not press the 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.

What were the facts?

This case involves an appeal filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (the Revenue) against Gayatri Crane Services Pvt Ltd (the assessee). The appeal was before the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad. The core of the matter is the tax effect involved in the appeal. It was an admitted position between the parties that the tax effect was less than Rs. 50,00,000/-. This fact was crucial in determining the future course of the appeal, given the prevailing circulars from the Central Board of Direct Taxes.

What were the issues?

The Tribunal had to decide whether the appeal should be entertained given the tax effect. The Revenue, represented by Mrs. Mauna Bhatt, did not press the appeal. The assessee was represented by Mr. S. N. Divatia. The primary issue revolved around the applicability of 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. This circular stipulated that appeals with a tax effect not exceeding Rs. 50,00,000/- should not be filed before the High Court and was made retrospectively applicable to pending appeals. The Revenue's contention, based on this circular, was that the appeal should not proceed.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

C/TAXAP/417/2013 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 417 of 2013 ========================================================== COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Versus GAYATRI CRANE SERVICES PVT LTD ========================================================== Appearance: MRS MAUNA M BHATT(174) for the APPELLANT(s) No. 1 MR SN DIVATIA(1378) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1 NOTICE SERVED(4) 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. S. N. Divatia, 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 Page 1 of 2

C/TAXAP/417/2013 ORDER present appeal. 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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →