PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2 vs. SHAILESH D. PRAJAPATI

PDF · subscribers
TAXAP/543/2017HC GujaratGJHC24057000201707 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 noted that the appeal was notified for passing an appropriate order due to its low tax effect, in accordance with Circular No. 17/2019. The Court observed that the appeal was not pressed by the Revenue in view of this circular. The circular establishes monetary limits for appeals, with Rs. 1,00,00,000 being the limit for appeals before the High Court. Given that the Revenue chose not to press the appeal based on this policy, the Court disposed of the appeal accordingly. The Court also 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 tax dispute was made.

What were the facts?

This matter concerns a Tax Appeal filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2 (the Revenue) against Shailesh D. Prajapati (the assessee). The appeal was notified for an appropriate order by the Registry. The appeal was brought to the High Court 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, which sets monetary limits for filing appeals. The circular specifies a monetary limit of Rs. 1,00,00,000 for appeals before the High Court.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed due to low tax effect, considering the CBDT Circular No. 17/2019. The Revenue argued that the appeal was not pressed due to the low tax effect, referencing Circular No. 17/2019. The circular provides monetary limits for filing appeals before various authorities, including the High Court, with a limit of Rs. 1,00,00,000. The Revenue's decision to not press the appeal is based on this policy, which aims to streamline litigation and focus on substantial tax disputes. The assessee's contentions, if any, are not recorded in the judgment.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

C/TAXAP/543/2017 ORDER DATED: 07/01/2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 543 of 2017 ========================================================== PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2 Versus SHAILESH D. PRAJAPATI ========================================================== Appearance: MR MANISH R. BHATT, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR M R BHATT & CO. (5953) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MR TEJ SHAH(5743) 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/543/2017 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 →