COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX SHIMLA vs. MS SINGHAL SOFTWARE PARWANOO

PDF · subscribers
ITA/40/2009HC Himachal PradeshHPHC01004560200905 April 2016Author: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MANSOOR AHMAD MIR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN4 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that it was not disputed that the total tax effect in each of these appeals was less than ₹20,00,000/- and that they did not fall within any of the exceptions mentioned in the circular. Consequently, the Court ordered that the present appeals stand disposed of. Pending applications, if any, were also disposed of. The judgment did not delve into the merits of the substantive tax disputes, as the appeals were disposed of based on the administrative instructions regarding tax effect.

What were the facts?

The appeals were filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Shimla, against various respondents including M/s Singhal Software, M/s Reliable Infosystems, M/s Globe Industries, and M/s N.B. Infotech. The appeals were listed for decision on April 5, 2016. The High Court noted a circular issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Direct Taxes, dated December 10, 2015, which directed the Income Tax Department to mention the tax effect exceeding ₹20,00,000/- while filing appeals in the High Court, except in specific matters. Pending appeals with a tax effect not exceeding ₹20,00,000/- were directed to be withdrawn or not pressed.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the pending appeals, where the tax effect does not exceed ₹20,00,000/-, should be withdrawn or not pressed, in accordance with Circular No. 21/2015? The Revenue contended that pursuant to Circular No. 21/2015 and the subsequent office order dated January 4, 2016, the appeals where the tax effect does not exceed ₹20,00,000/- and which do not fall under any of the specified exceptions, are to be disposed of by being withdrawn or not pressed. The Assessees' contentions were not recorded in the judgment.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA ITA No. 38 of 2009 along with ITA Nos. 39, 40, 41, 42, 52, 53 of 2009, 1 and 2 of 2011 Date of decision: 5.4.2016 1. ITA No. 38 of 2009 Commissioner of Income Tax, Shimla …Appellant Versus M/s Singhal Software, Parwanoo …Respondent 2. ITA No. 39 of 2009 Commissioner of Income Tax, Shimla …Appellant Versus M/s Singhal Software, Parwanoo …Respondent 3. ITA No. 40 of 2009 Commissioner of Income Tax, Shimla …Appellant Versus M/s Singhal Software, Parwanoo …Respondent 4. ITA No. 41 of 2009 Commissioner of Income Tax, Shimla …Appellant Versus M/s Singhal Software, Parwanoo …Respondent 5. ITA No. 42 of 2009 Commissioner of Income Tax, Shimla …Appellant Versus M/s Singhal Software, Parwanoo …Respondent 6. ITA No. 52 of 2009 Commissioner of Income Tax, Shimla …Appellant Versus M/s Reliable Infosystems. …Respondent 2 7. ITA No. 53 of 2009 Commissioner of Income Tax, Shimla …Appellant Versus M/s Globe Industries. …Respondent 8. ITA No. 1 of 2011 Commissioner of Income Tax, Shimla …Appellant Versus M/s N.B. Infotech. …Respondent 9. ITA No. 2 of 2011 Commissioner of Income Tax, Shimla …Appellant Versus M/s N.B. Infotech. …Respondent Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Appellant(s): Mr.Vinay Kuthiala, Senior Advocate, with Ms.Vandana Kuthiala, Advocate. For the Respondent(s): Mr. B.C. Negi, Senior Advocate with Mr.Goverdhan Sharma, Mr.Sushant Kaprate, Mr.Aditya Sood and Mr.Saurav Rattan, Advocates. Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Chief Justice (Oral) Pursuant to circular No. 21/2015 issued vide F.No. 279/Misc.142/2007-ITJ(Pt) by Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board Direct Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? 3 Taxes dated 10.12.2015, an office order dated 4th January, 2016 stands issued by the Registrar (Judicial & JB) of this Court to the following effect: “Hon’ble the Chief Justice has been pleased to

order in pursuance of circular No. 21/2015 issued vide F.No. 279/Misc.142/2007-ITJ(Pt) by Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board Direct Taxes dated 10.12.2015 as under: “(1) It is to be specifically mentioned by the Income Tax Department while filing the appeal in the High Court that the tax effect exceeds `20,00,000/- except in the following matters: (a) Where the Constitutional validity of the provisions of an Act or Rule are 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 additional relates to undisclosed foreign assets/bank accounts.

2.

The pending appeals where the tax effect does not exceed `20,00,000/- are directed to be withdrawn/not pressed.”

2.

It is not in dispute that the total tax factor is less than `20,00,000/- in each of these appeals and that they do not fall within anyone of the exceptions. As such, present appeals

4 stand disposed of. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

(Mansoor Ahmad Mir)

Chief Justice

(Tarlok Singh Chauhan)

Judge 5th April, 2016 (Rajni/KRS)

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →