PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-6 vs. NISHIT FINCAP PVT. LTD.
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court took the statement of the Revenue's counsel on record. Consequently, the Court disposed of the present appeal without examining the question/issue raised. The Court explicitly clarified that the issue/question is left open. Liberty was granted to the Revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal in case it is found that the matter is covered by an exception to the circular. The ratio decidendi is that appeals with a tax effect below a certain threshold, as per administrative instructions like Circular No.3 of 2018, can be disposed of without adjudication on merits, provided the party making the request seeks to leave the issue open and reserves liberty for revival under specific circumstances.
What were the facts?
The appeal was filed by the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-6 (Revenue) against Nishit Fincap Pvt. Ltd. (Assessee). The assessment year(s) are not specified in the provided text. The order or action under challenge is the appeal itself, filed before the High Court. The procedural history is that the Revenue's counsel stated that the tax effect in the appeal is below Rs.50 lakhs. This is in accordance with Circular No.3 of 2018 dated 11th July, 2018, which sets monetary limits for filing appeals. The Revenue requested to dispose of the appeal without answering the issue raised.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue should be disposed of without answering the question/issue raised, given that the tax effect is below Rs.50 lakhs as per Circular No.3 of 2018? (Question of procedure/administrative policy) Assessee's Contention: Not recorded in the judgment. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue, through its counsel, stated that the tax effect in the present appeal is below Rs.50 lakhs. Therefore, in terms of Circular No.3 of 2018 dated 11th July, 2018, the appeal may be disposed of without answering or examining the question/issue raised. The Revenue sought to leave the issue/question open.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
$~19 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 691/2016 PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-6 ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Asheesh Jain, Sr. St. Counsel with Mr.Dushyant Sarna, Adv. versus NISHIT FINCAP PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Kislaya Parashar with Ms. Umang Luthra, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI O R D E R % 16.11.2018 Counsel for the Revenue states that the tax effect in the present appeal is below Rs.50 lakhs and hence, in terms of Circular No.3 of 2018 dated 11th July, 2018, the appeal may be disposed of without answering or examining the question/issue raised. It may be clarified that the issue/question is left open. Taking the statement on record, we dispose of the present appeal without examining the question/issue raised, which is left open. Liberty is granted to the Revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal in case it is found that the matter is covered by an exception. SANJIV KHANNA, J. ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI, J. NOVEMBER 16, 2018/uj
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Vandemataram Projects Private Limited vs. Raipur Development AuthorityChhattisgarh · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Surya Prakash Aroma vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh And 2 OthersAllahabad · 27 Oct 2026
- Mrs. Aqsa Begum vs. Union Of INDIATelangana · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Govindjee Dairy Milk Private Limited vs. Central Goods And Services TaxRajasthan · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S. V J Petro Products vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St) - IiiAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
