PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VADODARA 1 vs. FLORENCE V PARMAR

PDF · subscribers
TAXAP/991/2017HC GujaratGJHC24057230201701 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 decided that the appeal should be disposed of as not pressed. The reasoning was based on the submission by the Revenue's counsel that the tax effect involved was below the monetary limit stipulated in Circular No. 17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019. This circular mandates that appeals with a tax effect not exceeding Rs. 1,00,00,000/- should not be filed before the High Court and applies retrospectively to pending appeals. Consequently, the Revenue did not press the appeal. The ratio decidendi is that appeals falling below the prescribed monetary limit for filing before the High Court, as per CBDT circulars, should be withdrawn or not pressed. The operative direction was to dispose of the appeal as not pressed. The court 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. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

This case involves an appeal filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Vadodara (the Revenue) against Florence V Parmar (the assessee). The appeal was filed before the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad. The assessment year(s) are not explicitly stated in the judgment. The order or action under challenge is the appeal itself, filed by the Revenue. The procedural history is that the Revenue filed the present appeal. During the hearing, the Revenue's counsel stated that the tax effect involved in the appeal is less than Rs. 1,00,00,000/-. The amount in dispute is therefore the tax effect, which is stated to be below this threshold.

What were the issues?

The primary issue before the High Court was whether the appeal filed by the Revenue should be entertained given the tax effect involved. The Revenue's contention, as presented by its counsel, was that the tax effect in the appeal is less than Rs. 1,00,00,000/-. In light of this, the Revenue relied on Circular No. 17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019, issued by the CBDT. This circular stipulates that no appeal shall be filed before the High Court if the tax effect does not exceed Rs. 1,00,00,000/-, and it has been made retrospectively applicable to pending appeals. The Revenue argued that based on this circular, the present appeal should not be pressed. The judgment does not record any arguments from the assessee's side.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

C/TAXAP/991/2017 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 991 of 2017 ========================================================== PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VADODARA 1 Versus FLORENCE V PARMAR ========================================================== 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/991/2017 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 →