COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX I vs. JASWANTBHAI R THAKKAR

PDF · subscribers
TAXAP/509/2013HC GujaratGJHC24043400201329 January 2019Bench: HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI,HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A. P. THAKER2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal held that the appeal is to be disposed of as not pressed. This decision is based on the admitted position that the tax effect involved in the appeal is less than Rs. 50,00,000/-. The Tribunal relied on Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11th July, 2018, which mandates that appeals with a tax effect not exceeding Rs. 50,00,000/- should not be filed before the High Court and is applicable retrospectively to pending appeals. Consequently, the Revenue's counsel did not press the appeal. The operative direction is that the appeal is disposed of as not pressed. However, the Tribunal granted liberty to the appellant to seek revival of the appeal if there is any error in the computation of the tax effect or if the circular is not applicable for any reason. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

This is an appeal filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax I (the Revenue) against Jaswantbhai R Thakkar (the assessee). The appeal challenges an order, though the specific order and assessment year(s) are not detailed in the provided text. The procedural history indicates that the appeal was filed before the High Court of Gujarat. A crucial fact is the admitted position between the parties that the tax effect involved in this appeal is less than Rs. 50,00,000/-.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the present appeal is maintainable before the High Court given the tax effect involved. The Revenue, through its learned Senior Standing Counsel, argued that the appeal should be disposed of as not pressed. This contention is based on Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11th July, 2018, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. This circular stipulates that no appeal where the tax effect does not exceed Rs. 50,00,000/- shall be filed before the High Court and is retrospectively applicable to pending appeals. The Assessee, represented by learned advocates, did not present any arguments against the Revenue's submission regarding the circular's applicability.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

C/TAXAP/509/2013 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 509 of 2013 ========================================================== COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX I Versus JASWANTBHAI R THAKKAR ========================================================== Appearance: MR.VARUN K.PATEL(3802) for the APPELLANT MR MAUNISH T PATHAK(5892) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1 MR PARITOSH CALLA(2972) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI and HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE A. P. THAKER

Date : 29/01/2019

ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI) 1. Heard Mr. Varun K. Patel, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant and Mr. Maunish Pathak, 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 present appeal. Page 1 of 2

C/TAXAP/509/2013 ORDER 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) V.R. PANCHAL Page 2 of 2

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →