PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-VADODARA-1 vs. RASHMIKANT CHHAGANBHAI PATEL

PDF · subscribers
TAXAP/887/2016HC GujaratGJHC24052027201601 October 2019Bench: HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI,HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SANGEETA K. VISHEN2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that since the tax effect involved in the appeal is less than Rs. 1,00,00,000/-, and in light of CBDT Circular No. 17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019, 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 pending appeals, the learned senior standing counsel for the appellant does not press the present appeal. Consequently, the appeal is disposed of as not pressed in light of the Circular dated 08.08.2019. The Court 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, it would be open for the appellant to seek revival of the appeal. No specific issue was left undecided.

What were the facts?

This is a Tax Appeal filed by the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-Vadodara-1 against the respondent, Rashmikant Chhaganbhai Patel. The appeal concerns assessment year(s) not specified in the judgment. The order or action under challenge is not detailed, nor is the authority that passed it. The procedural history is that the appeal was filed before the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad. The amount in dispute is stated to be less than Rs. 1,00,00,000/-. The appeal was heard by the High Court on October 1, 2019.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal can be pressed in light of the CBDT Circular No. 17 of 2019 regarding monetary limits for filing appeals before the High Court? The assessee (Revenue) argued that the tax effect involved in the appeal is less than Rs. 1,00,00,000/-. Therefore, in light of CBDT Circular No. 17 of 2019, 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 does not press the present appeal. The judgment does not record any argument from the respondent.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

C/TAXAP/887/2016 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 887 of 2016 ========================================================== PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-VADODARA-1 Versus RASHMIKANT CHHAGANBHAI PATEL ========================================================== Appearance: MR KM PARIKH(575) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 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 Page 1 of 2

C/TAXAP/887/2016 ORDER has also been made retrospectively applicable to 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 →