PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VADODARA 1 vs. AMBALAL SARABHAI ENTERPRISE LTD

PDF · subscribers
TAXAP/867/2018HC GujaratGJHC24035829201801 October 2019Bench: HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI,HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SANGEETA K. VISHEN2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal noted that the learned senior standing counsel for the appellant stated that the tax effect involved in the appeal was less than Rs. 1,00,00,000/-. In light of Circular No. 17 of 2019, dated 08.08.2019, issued by the CBDT, which mandates 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 learned senior standing counsel for the appellant did not press the present appeal. Consequently, the appeal was disposed of as not pressed. The Tribunal also granted liberty to the appellant to seek revival of the appeal if there was any error in the computation of the tax effect or if the circular was not applicable for any reason.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Vadodara 1, against Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprise Ltd. The assessment year(s) are not specified. The appeal challenges an order or action, the nature of which is not detailed. The procedural history indicates that the appellant's counsel stated the tax effect involved in the appeal was less than Rs. 1,00,00,000/-. This statement was made in the context of a circular issued by the CBDT regarding monetary limits for filing appeals before the High Court.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the present appeal, with a tax effect below Rs. 1,00,00,000/-, should be pressed before the High Court, considering Circular No. 17 of 2019. Assessee's Contention: The assessee (appellant) did not press the appeal. This was based on the submission that the tax effect was less than Rs. 1,00,00,000/-, and Circular No. 17 of 2019, dated 08.08.2019, stipulated that appeals with a tax effect not exceeding Rs. 1,00,00,000/- should not be filed before the High Court. The circular was also stated to be retrospectively applicable to pending appeals. Revenue's Contention: No specific contention was recorded for the revenue (respondent) as the appellant did not press the appeal.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

C/TAXAP/867/2018 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 867 of 2018 ========================================================== PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VADODARA 1 Versus AMBALAL SARABHAI ENTERPRISE LTD ========================================================== Appearance: MR.VARUN K.PATEL(3802) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MR B S SOPARKAR(6851) 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.B.S. Soparkar, 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/867/2018 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 →