PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1 vs. M.D. SHAH AND CO

PDF · subscribers
TAXAP/664/2016HC GujaratGJHC24018805201607 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 held that the appeal is not pressed by the Revenue due to the low tax effect, in line with Circular No. 17/2019. The circular provides a monetary limit of Rs. 1,00,00,000 for appeals before the High Court. The reasoning is that the appeal falls within the scope of the policy outlined in the circular, which guides the decision on whether to pursue appeals based on their financial implications. The ratio decidendi is that appeals with a low tax effect, as defined by the CBDT circular, may be withdrawn or not pressed. The operative direction is that the appeal is disposed of accordingly. The liberty is reserved for the Revenue to revive the tax appeal in case of any difficulty.

What were the facts?

This matter concerns Tax Appeal No. 664 of 2016 filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1 (the Revenue) against M.D. Shah and Co. (the assessee). The appeal was notified for an appropriate order. The appeal was not pressed by the Revenue due to a low tax effect, in accordance with Circular No. 17/2019 dated August 8, 2019, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. This circular outlines monetary limits for filing appeals. The judgment notes that the appeal is to be disposed of based on this policy, with liberty reserved for the Revenue to revive the appeal 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 and fact) Assessee's Contentions: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the assessee. The appeal is being disposed of based on the Revenue's decision not to press it. Revenue's Contentions: The Revenue submitted that the appeal is not pressed in view of the low tax effect, having regard to Circular No. 17/2019 dated August 8, 2019. This circular establishes monetary limits for appeals before various authorities, including the High Court, which is Rs. 1,00,00,000.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

C/TAXAP/664/2016 ORDER DATED: 07/01/2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 664 of 2016 ========================================================== PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1 Versus M.D. SHAH AND CO ========================================================== Appearance: MR MANISH R. BHATT, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR M R BHATT & CO. (5953) for the Appellant(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/664/2016 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 →