PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, RAJKOT vs. JAYANTIBHAI THAKKAR

PDF · subscribers

TAXAP/536/2017HC GujaratGJHC24056998201727 January 2020Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA2 pages

AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the appeal was not pressed by the Revenue in view of the low tax effect, as per Circular No. 17/2019. The circular sets a monetary limit of Rs. 1,00,00,000 for appeals before the High Court. Since the appeal fell within the scope of this policy, the Revenue chose not to pursue it. The Court disposed of the appeal accordingly. The reasoning is based on the administrative policy of the Revenue to avoid litigation in cases with low tax effect. The ratio decidendi is that appeals with low tax effect, as defined by CBDT circulars, can be withdrawn or not pressed by the Revenue. The operative direction was to dispose of the appeal, with liberty reserved for the Revenue to revive it if any difficulty arose.

What were the facts?

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Rajkot (the Revenue) filed a Tax Appeal before the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad against an order concerning Jayantibhai Thakkar (the assessee). The appeal was notified for an appropriate order due to a low tax effect. The Revenue decided not to press the appeal in light of Circular No. 17/2019 dated August 8, 2019, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. This circular outlines revised monetary limits for filing appeals. The appeal was disposed of accordingly, with liberty reserved for the Revenue to revive it in case of difficulty.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed due to low tax effect as per Circular No. 17/2019? (Question of law) Assessee's Contentions: The assessee did not make any specific contentions as the appeal was not pressed by the Revenue. The judgment records no argument for the assessee. Revenue's Contentions: The Revenue submitted that the appeal was not pressed in view of the low tax effect, citing Circular No. 17/2019 dated August 8, 2019. This circular establishes monetary limits for appeals before various authorities, including the High Court, which was Rs. 1,00,00,000. The Revenue relied on this policy to withdraw its appeal.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

C/TAXAP/536/2017 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 536 of 2017 ========================================================== PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, RAJKOT Versus JAYANTIBHAI THAKKAR ========================================================== Appearance: MRS MAUNA M BHATT(174) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 RULE SERVED(64) for the Opponent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA

Date : 27/01/2020

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 8th 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 8th 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/536/2017 ORDER Sr. No. Appeals/SLPs in Incometax 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) (BHARGAV D. KARIA, J) GIRISH Page 2 of 2

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →