COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I vs. JAYANTILAL RATILAL SONI

PDF · subscribers
TAXAP/866/2011HC GujaratGJHC24045209201127 November 2018Bench: HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI,HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A. P. THAKER2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the appeal was not pressed by the appellant (Revenue) in light of Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11th July, 2018. The circular mandates that appeals with a tax effect not exceeding Rs. 50,00,000/- should not be filed before the High Court and is applicable retrospectively to pending appeals. Since the tax effect in this case was admitted to be less than Rs. 50,00,000/-, the learned senior standing counsel for the appellant did not press the appeal. The Court accordingly disposed of the appeal as not pressed. The judgment also noted that if there was any error in the computation of the tax effect or if the circular was not applicable for any reason, the appellant would be at liberty to seek revival of the appeal. No finding was given on the merits of the original dispute.

What were the facts?

This is an appeal filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax-I against an order concerning Jayantilal Ratilal Soni. The appeal was filed before the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad. The material fact that emerged during the hearing was that the tax effect involved in the appeal was less than Rs. 50,00,000/-. This fact was admitted by both parties. The appeal was filed for assessment year(s) not specified in the judgment.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal is maintainable before the High Court given the tax effect involved? The Revenue (appellant) argued that the appeal should be dismissed as not pressed. This contention was based on Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11th July, 2018, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. This circular stipulates that no appeal shall be filed before the High Court if the tax effect does not exceed Rs. 50,00,000/-, and it has been made retrospectively applicable to pending appeals. The Assessee (respondent) did not present any arguments as the Revenue conceded the appeal on the basis of the circular.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

C/TAXAP/866/2011 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 866 of 2011 ========================================================== COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I Versus JAYANTILAL RATILAL SONI ========================================================== Appearance: MRS MAUNA M BHATT(174) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1 MR TUSHAR P HEMANI(2790) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1 MS VAIBHAVI K PARIKH(3238) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI and HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE A. P. THAKER

Date : 27/11/2018

ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI) 1. Heard Mrs. Mauna Bhatt, learned senior standing counsel for the appellant and Mr. Tushar Hemani, learned advocate for the respondent. 2. It is an admitted position between the parties that the tax effect involved in this appeal is less than Rs.50,00,000/-. Under the circumstances, in the light of the Circular No.3/2018 dated 11th July, 2018 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.50,00,000/- shall be filed before the High Court and has also been made retrospectively applicable to pending appeals, the learned senior standing counsel for the appellant does not press the Page 1 of 2

C/TAXAP/866/2011 ORDER present appeal. 3. The appeal is accordingly disposed of as not pressed in the light of the Circular dated 11th July, 2018. 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) (A. P. THAKER, J) B.U. PARMAR Page 2 of 2

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →