PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3, AHMEDABAD vs. NIRMA LID

PDF · subscribers

TAXAP/763/2016HC GujaratGJHC24051939201627 January 2020Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA2 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 accordance with Circular No. 17/2019 dated August 8, 2019. The circular specifies a monetary limit of Rs. 1,00,00,000 for appeals before the High Court. The reasoning is that the Revenue has a policy to withdraw or not press appeals that fall below these monetary thresholds to streamline litigation. The Tribunal's decision is to dispose of the appeal accordingly. The court explicitly reserved the liberty for the Revenue to revive the tax appeal in case of any difficulty. No specific issue regarding the merits of the original assessment or the ITAT's order was decided.

What were the facts?

This matter concerns a Tax Appeal filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-3, Ahmedabad (the Revenue) against Nirma Ltd. (the assessee). The appeal was listed for an appropriate order 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. This circular outlines revised monetary limits for filing appeals. The appeal was disposed of based on this circular, with liberty reserved for the Revenue to revive it if any difficulty arose.

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) Assessee's Contentions: The assessee did not explicitly argue any points as the appeal was not pressed. However, the underlying reason for not pressing the appeal is the low tax effect, as per the Revenue's submission. Revenue's Contentions: The Revenue contended that the appeal is not pressed in view of the low tax effect, citing Circular No. 17/2019. This circular establishes monetary limits for appeals before various authorities, including the High Court, which is Rs. 1,00,00,000. The appeal falls within this category and is therefore not being pursued.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

C/TAXAP/763/2016 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 763 of 2016 ========================================================== PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3, AHMEDABAD Versus NIRMA LID ========================================================== Appearance: MRS MAUNA M BHATT(174) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MR B S SOPARKAR(6851) for the Opponent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA

Date : 27/01/2020

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 8th 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 8th 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/763/2016 ORDER Sr. No. Appeals/SLPs in Incometax 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) (BHARGAV D. KARIA, J) GIRISH Page 2 of 2

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →