COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX I vs. GUJARAT FLUOROCHEMICALS LTD.

PDF · subscribers
TAXAP/650/2013HC GujaratGJHC24043454201301 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 of Gujarat, in light of the submission made by the Revenue's learned senior standing counsel regarding the tax effect being less than Rs. 1,00,00,000/-, disposed of the appeal as not pressed. This decision was based on CBDT Circular No. 17 of 2019, which provides that appeals with a tax effect not exceeding Rs. 1,00,00,000/- should not be filed before the High Court and is applicable retrospectively to pending appeals. The Court granted liberty to the appellant (Revenue) to seek revival of the appeal if there was any error in the computation of the tax effect or if the Circular was not applicable for any reason. No decision was made on the merits of the case.

What were the facts?

This case involves an appeal filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax I (the Revenue) against Gujarat Fluorochemicals Ltd. (the assessee). The appeal is against an order passed by an Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (though the specific order and assessment year(s) are not detailed). The Revenue, through its learned senior standing counsel, stated that the tax effect in the present appeal is less than Rs. 1,00,00,000/-. This statement was made in the context of a Circular issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT). The appeal was filed before the High Court of Gujarat.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the present appeal, where the tax effect is less than Rs. 1,00,00,000/-, should be pressed before the High Court, considering CBDT Circular No. 17 of 2019. The Revenue's contention, as presented by its learned senior standing counsel, was that the tax effect in the appeal is below the monetary limit stipulated in Circular No. 17 of 2019. This circular mandates that no appeal where the tax effect does not exceed Rs. 1,00,00,000/- shall be filed before the High Court and is retrospectively applicable to pending appeals. Consequently, the Revenue stated that it does not press the present appeal. The assessee's contentions are not recorded in the judgment.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

C/TAXAP/650/2013 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 650 of 2013 ========================================================== COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX I Versus GUJARAT FLUOROCHEMICALS LTD. ========================================================== Appearance: MR.VARUN K.PATEL(3802) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MR B S SOPARKAR(6851) 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.B.S. Soparkar, 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/650/2013 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 →