COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - I vs. UPENDRA N PATEL

PDF · subscribers
TAXAP/696/2010HC GujaratGJHC24046101201001 October 2019Bench: HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI,HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SANGEETA K. VISHEN2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal decided that the appeal would not be pressed by the revenue. The reasoning was based on the Circular No. 17 of 2019 issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Direct Taxes. This circular mandates 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. Consequently, the revenue's counsel stated that they did not press the appeal. The Tribunal accordingly disposed of the appeal as not pressed. The ratio decidendi is that appeals falling below the specified monetary limit in the relevant CBDT circulars, especially when made retrospective, should be withdrawn or not pressed by the revenue. The operative direction was to dispose of the appeal as not pressed. The judgment also noted that if there is any error in the computation of the tax effect or if the circular is not applicable for any reason, the appellant would be at liberty to seek revival of the appeal. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax - I (the revenue) against Upendra N Patel (the assessee). The assessment year(s) are not specified. The order or action under challenge is not detailed, but it is an appeal before the High Court of Gujarat. The procedural history involves the revenue filing the present appeal. The tax effect involved in the appeal was stated by the revenue's counsel to be less than Rs. 1,00,00,000/-.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the present appeal, with a tax effect less than Rs. 1,00,00,000/-, is maintainable before the High Court, considering the CBDT Circular No. 17 of 2019. The revenue, through its learned senior standing counsel, argued that the tax effect in the appeal is less than Rs. 1,00,00,000/-. In light of CBDT Circular No. 17 of 2019, which stipulates that no appeal with a tax effect not exceeding Rs. 1,00,00,000/- shall be filed before the High Court and which is retrospectively applicable to pending appeals, 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/696/2010 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 696 of 2010 ========================================================== COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - I Versus UPENDRA N PATEL ========================================================== Appearance: MR.VARUN K.PATEL(3802) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MR MANISH J SHAH(1320) 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.Manish J. Shah, 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/696/2010 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 →