PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-VADODARA-1 vs. INOX INDIA LTD

PDF · subscribers
TAXAP/419/2017HC GujaratGJHC24056939201701 October 2019Bench: HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI,HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SANGEETA K. VISHEN2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that in light of the submission by the Revenue's learned senior standing counsel regarding the tax effect being less than Rs. 1,00,00,000/- and the applicability of Circular No. 17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019, the appeal was not pressed. The Court accordingly disposed of the appeal as not pressed. The reasoning was based on the Revenue's own concession and the directive of the CBDT circular. The ratio decidendi is that appeals with a tax effect below the prescribed monetary limit, as per CBDT circulars, are not to be pressed by the Revenue. The operative direction was to dispose of the appeal as not pressed. The Court also provided liberty to the appellant to seek revival of the appeal in case of any error in the computation of the tax effect or if the circular is not applicable.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Vadodara-1 (Revenue) against INOX India Ltd (Assessee). The assessment year(s) are not specified. The order or action under challenge is the appeal itself, which the Revenue sought to withdraw. The amount in dispute is stated to be less than Rs. 1,00,00,000/-. The procedural history is that the Revenue, through its learned senior standing counsel, informed the High Court that the tax effect was below the monetary limit prescribed by a CBDT circular, and therefore, did not press the appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the present appeal, involving a tax effect less than Rs. 1,00,00,000/-, should be entertained by the High Court, considering Circular No. 17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019 issued by the CBDT. (Question of law) Assessee's contentions: Not recorded. Revenue's contentions: The Revenue, through its learned senior standing counsel, argued that the tax effect involved in the appeal is less than Rs. 1,00,00,000/-. Relying on Circular No. 17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019, which stipulates that no appeal with a tax effect not exceeding Rs. 1,00,00,000/- shall be filed before the High Court and that this circular is retrospectively applicable to pending appeals, the Revenue stated that it does not press the present appeal.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

C/TAXAP/419/2017 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 419 of 2017 ========================================================== PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-VADODARA-1 Versus INOX INDIA LTD ========================================================== Appearance: MR.VARUN K.PATEL(3802) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 DARSHAN R PATEL(8486) 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.Darshan R. Patel, 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 has also been made retrospectively applicable to Page 1 of 2

C/TAXAP/419/2017 ORDER 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 →