COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AHMEDABAD III vs. NAILESH T SHAH

PDF · subscribers
TAXAP/669/2014HC GujaratGJHC24044920201407 January 2022Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA,HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal decided that the Tax Appeal should be disposed of due to its low tax effect, as per Circular No. 17/2019 dated August 8, 2019. The reasoning was based on the new policy outlined in the circular, which 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, it was not pressed. The operative direction was to dispose of the appeal accordingly. The Court reserved liberty for the Revenue to revive the tax appeal in case of any difficulty. No specific issue was left undecided; the appeal was disposed of on procedural grounds related to the tax effect policy.

What were the facts?

This matter concerns a Tax Appeal filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Ahmedabad III, against Naileh T. Shah. The appeal was listed for an appropriate order by the Registry. The appeal was notified due to its low tax effect, and the Court was to consider 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 Court noted the policy reflected in the circular, which sets monetary thresholds for appeals before various authorities, including the High Court at Rs. 1,00,00,000. The appeal was disposed of in light of this circular.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Tax Appeal should be dismissed on the grounds of low tax effect, considering Circular No. 17/2019 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes? (Question of law) Assessee's Contention: The appeal is not pressed due to the low tax effect, in accordance with Circular No. 17/2019. The assessee relied on the policy outlined in this circular, which specifies monetary limits for appeals before the High Court. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records no specific argument from the Revenue regarding the merits of the appeal. The appeal's disposition is based on the low tax effect policy as per the circular.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

C/TAXAP/669/2014 ORDER DATED: 07/01/2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 669 of 2014 ========================================================== COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AHMEDABAD III Versus NAILESH T SHAH ========================================================== Appearance: MR MANISH R. BHATT, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR M R BHATT & CO. (5953) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 RULE SERVED(64) 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/669/2014 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 →