COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I vs. REKHABEN HASMUKHLAL JARIWALA

PDF · subscribers
TAXAP/989/2011HC GujaratGJHC24045272201117 September 2018Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.N. KARIA3 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court granted the Revenue's request to withdraw the appeals. The Court noted that the Revenue, acting under instructions from the department, sought permission to withdraw the appeals because the tax effect involved was below the minimum threshold limit set by the CBDT in its circular dated 11.07.2018. This circular enables the department to refrain from preferring and maintaining appeals before the High Court when the tax effect is below the prescribed limit. Consequently, the Court granted the permission sought and disposed of the Tax Appeals accordingly. No specific findings on the merits of the individual appeals were made, as the withdrawal was based on administrative policy and monetary limits.

What were the facts?

The Commissioner of Income Tax I (Revenue) filed numerous Tax Appeals before the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad against the orders of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The appeals were filed by the Revenue against the respondent, Mahendra Shantilal Vyas (Assessee). The specific assessment years are not mentioned in the provided text. The Revenue sought permission to withdraw these appeals. The reason cited for withdrawal was that the tax effect involved in these appeals was below the minimum threshold limit stipulated by the CBDT in its circular dated 11.07.2018, which governs the department's ability to prefer and maintain appeals before the High Court.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Revenue is permitted to withdraw the present Tax Appeals on the ground that the tax effect is below the threshold limit prescribed by the CBDT circular dated 11.07.2018? (Question of law) The Revenue contended that as per the CBDT circular dated 11.07.2018, the department is empowered to withdraw appeals where the tax effect falls below a specified monetary limit. The Revenue, acting under instructions from the department, sought permission to withdraw these appeals based on this circular. The Assessee's contentions are not recorded in the provided text.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

C/TAXAP/1124/2014 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 1124 of 2014 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 109 of 2016 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 1216 of 2014 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 1251 of 2014 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 1385 of 2014 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 148 of 2016 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 159 of 2017 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 188 of 2015 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 189 of 2015 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 204 of 2016 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 258 of 2017 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 273 of 2017 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 275 of 2017 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 329 of 2015 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 330 of 2015 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 366 of 2015 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 390 of 2016 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 391 of 2016 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 399 of 2015 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 400 of 2015 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 435 of 2015 Page 1 of 3

C/TAXAP/1124/2014 ORDER With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 589 of 2015 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 630 of 2018 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 673 of 2018 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 692 of 2017 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 696 of 2016 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 781 of 2015 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 786 of 2015 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 876 of 2017 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 930 of 2017 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 932 of 2017 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 989 of 2011 ========================================================== COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX I Versus MAHENDRA SHANTILAL VYAS ========================================================== Appearance: MR.VARUN K.PATEL, Mrs. KALPANA RAVAL, MRS MAUNA BHATT for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1 MR RK PATEL, MR B S SOPARKAR, MR MANISH SHAH, MR TUSHAR HEMANI, MR BHAUMIK DHOLARIYA for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.N. KARIA

Date : 17/09/2018 ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI) Learned advocate for the appellant, under instructions from the department, sought permission to withdraw these appeals since the Page 2 of 3

C/TAXAP/1124/2014 ORDER tax effect involved in these appeals is below the minimum threshold limit provided by CBDT in its circular dated 11.07.2018 enabling the department to prefer and maintain appeals before the High Court. Permission is granted. Tax Appeals are disposed of accordingly. (AKIL KURESHI, J) (B.N. KARIA, J) JYOTI V. JANI Page 3 of 3

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →