Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax I vs. Omprakash Dhanwani
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court allowed the prayer for withdrawal of the appeals. The Court noted that the Revenue's counsel stated that the present appeals were covered under the circulars issued by the Department and consequently prayed for their withdrawal. The Court granted this prayer, dismissing the appeals as withdrawn. However, the Court explicitly stated that the question of law was left open. The reasoning for the withdrawal was based on the Revenue's assessment that the appeals fell within the scope of the circulars, leading to the decision to withdraw rather than contest on merits. The specific nature of the appeals or the underlying tax disputes that led to the original filing before the Tribunal were not discussed or decided.
What were the facts?
The appeals were filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Revenue) against orders passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The appeals involved multiple assessees: M/s. Kalani Brothers Indore Pvt Ltd., M/s. Padma Homes Pvt Ltd., and OmPrakash Dhanwani. The appeals were filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) had issued circulars (No. 3/2018, revised on 20/08/2018, and further circulars on 08/08/2019 and 06/09/2019) specifying monetary limits for filing appeals before High Courts and the Supreme Court, with exceptions for certain categories of cases to be contested on merits. The Revenue's counsel, citing these circulars, prayed for the withdrawal of the present appeals.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the present appeals are maintainable before this Court given the monetary limits prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 and its subsequent revisions, or if they fall under the exceptions for mandatory contestation on merits. Assessee's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the assessees regarding the maintainability of the appeals or the applicability of the circulars. The assessees are not recorded as having made any arguments. Revenue's Contention: The learned counsel for the appellant (Revenue) submitted that the present appeals are covered under the circulars issued by the Department and, therefore, prayed for the withdrawal of the appeals. The Revenue relied on the circulars issued by the CBDT regarding monetary limits for filing appeals and the exceptions thereto.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
--- 1 --- HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : BENCH AT INDORE D.B.: HON'BLE MR. S. C. SHARMA AND HON'BLE MR. SHAILENDRA SHUKLA, JJ INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 39 / 2016 THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. M/S. KALANI BROTHERS INDORE PVT LTD. INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 49 / 2016 THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. M/S. PADMA HOMES PVT LTD. INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 50 / 2016 THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. M/S. PADMA HOMES PVT LTD. INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 111 / 2016 THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. OMPRAKASH DHANWANI INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 112 / 2016 THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. OMPRAKASH DHANWANI * * * * * O R D E R (31/10/2019) PER : S. C. SHARMA, J :- The present appeal has been filed u/S. 260A of the Income Tax Act 1961 by the Commissioner of Income Tax Indore against the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Central Board of Direct Taxes has issued a circular No. 3/2018 fixing the monetary limit for filing of appeals before the High Courts and before the Supreme Court. However, certain appeals are to be --- 2 --- decided on merits. Paragraph 10 of the Circular dated 11/07/2018 reads as under: Para 10 of the Circular dated 11/7/2018 reads as under : 10. Adverse judgments relating to the following issues should be contested on merits notwithstanding that the tax effect entailed is less than the monetary limits specified in para 3 above or there is no tax effect : (a) Where the Constitutional validity of the provisions of an Act or Rule is under challenge, or (b) Where Board's order, Notification, Instruction or Circular has been held to be illegal or ultra vires, or (c) Where Revenue Audit objection in the case has been accepted by the Department, or (d) Where the addition relates to undisclosed foreign assets / bank accounts. That the circular no. 3/2018 was further revised by the circular dated 20/08/2018 and paragraph 10 was amended as under : 3. Para 10 of the said Circular provides that adverse judgments relating to the issues enumerated in the said para should be contested on merits notwithstanding that the tax effect entailed is less than the monetary limits specified in para 3 thereof or there is no tax effect. Para 10 of the Circular No.3 of 2018 dated 11/7/2018 is hereby amended as under: 10. Adverse judgments relating to the following issues should be contested on merits notwithstanding that the tax effect entailed is less than the monetary limits specified in para 3 above or there is no tax effect : (a) Where the Constitutional validity of the provisions of an Act or Rule is under challenge, or (b) Where Board's order, Notification, Instruction or Circular has been held to be illegal or ultra vires, or (c) Where Revenue Audit objection in the case has been accepted by the Department, or (d) Where the addition relates to undisclosed foreign income / undisclosed foreign assets (including financial assets) / undisclosed foreign bank account. (e) Where addition is based on information received from external sources in the nature of law enforcement agencies such as CBI / ED / DRI / SFIO / Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI). (f) Cases where prosecution has been filed by the Department and is pending in the Court. Thereafter another circular was issued on 08/08/2019 and the monetary limit was enhanced to Rs. 1.00 crore in respect of High Court. A further clarificatory circular was issued on 6th September, 2019 and the Department has been permitted, irrespective of valuation, to file an appeal on merits in cases involved in organized --- 3 --- tax evasion activity (Circular dated 6th September, 2019). The present appeal is covered under the circular issued by the Department and the learned counsel for the appellant prays for withdrawal of the present appeal. The prayer is allowed. The appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. However, the question of law is left open. (S. C. SHARMA) J U D G E (SHAILENDRA SHUKLA) J U D G E KR Digitally signed by Kamal Rathor Date: 2019.11.04 15:20:30 +05'30'
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Imtiyaz Shaikh Z Chorlekar vs. Salman ShaikhBombay · 21 Oct 2026
- Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University Thr Its Registrar Prashant S Amrutkar vs. Union Of INDIA Thr The Secretary And OthersBombay · 19 Oct 2026
- Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University Thr Registrar Prashant S Amrutkar vs. Union Of INDIA Thr Secretary And OthersBombay · 19 Oct 2026
- Vinishma Technologies Private Limited vs. State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026
- Vinishma Technologies Private Limited vs. State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026