Commissioner of Income Tax - V vs. M/s. Teja Constructions

ITTA/600/2015HC TelanganaHBHC01045028201502 June 2016Author: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY1 pages

AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court granted the permission as prayed for by the appellant. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn. The court noted the appellant's submission that the withdrawal was based on CBDT Circular No. 3/2018, as the tax effect was below the monetary limit of Rs. 50,00,000/- and the case did not qualify for any exceptions. The appellant was granted liberty to revive the appeal at a later stage if any discrepancy came to notice, acknowledging the possibility of human error. No decision was made on the merits of the original dispute.

What were the facts?

This case involves a Tax Appeal filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2 against Gujarat Mineral Development Corporation Ltd. The appeal was filed before the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad. The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant submitted a note along with a communication from the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Judicial). This communication instructed the withdrawal of the appeal because the tax effect was below the monetary limit of Rs. 50,00,000/- and the case did not fall under any exceptional clauses as per CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018. The appellant reserved the right to revive the appeal if any discrepancy was discovered later, acknowledging the possibility of human error.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be withdrawn as per the instructions of the CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 due to the tax effect being below the monetary limit. (Question of law) Assessee's Contention: The assessee (Revenue in this appeal) did not make any arguments as the appeal was withdrawn by the appellant. Revenue's Contention: The appellant (Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2) argued for the withdrawal of the appeal. This was based on CBDT Circular No. 3/2018, which stipulates a monetary limit of Rs. 50,00,000/- for filing appeals. The appellant stated that the tax effect in this case was below this limit and did not fall under any exceptional categories mentioned in the circular. The appellant also sought liberty to revive the appeal if any discrepancies were found later.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

C/TAXAP/600/2015 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 600 of 2015 ========================================================== THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2 Versus GUJARAT MINERAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD ========================================================== Appearance: MRS MAUNA M BHATT(174) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1 MR B S SOPARKAR(6851) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1 RULE SERVED(64) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI and HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE A. P. THAKER Date : 27/11/2018

ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI)

Ms. Mauna Bhatt, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant has submitted a note together with a communication dated 29.10.2018 of the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Judicial), for Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Gujarat, Ahmedabad, instructing her to withdraw the appeal as the tax effect is below the monetary limit of Rs.50,00,000/- and the case does not fall in the exceptional clauses as per the CBDT Circular No.3/2018 dated 11.07.2018, reserving a right to revive the appeal in case any discrepancy comes to notice at a later stage after withdrawal of the appeal as human error cannot be ruled out.

Permission as prayed for is granted. The appeal is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as aforesaid. (HARSHA DEVANI, J) (A. P. THAKER, J) Vijay

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →