COMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MS SHRI DHANWANTRI HERBALS

PDF · subscribers

ITA/4010/2013HC Himachal PradeshHPHC01023358201325 February 2016Author: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MANSOOR AHMAD MIR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESHWAR THAKUR2 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Himachal Pradesh, comprising the Chief Justice and a Judge, decided to dispose of all the appeals along with pending applications in terms of Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10th December, 2015. This decision was based on the submission made by the learned counsel for the respondents that the total amount involved in all the appeals was less than ₹20,00,000/-. The Court noted that the photostat copy of the circular was made part of the order. The reasoning is that the circular provides for the disposal of appeals where the tax effect is below a specified limit, and the condition of the amount being less than ₹20,00,000/- was met. The ratio decidendi is that appeals involving a tax effect below the threshold stipulated in CBDT circulars should be disposed of in accordance with such circulars, provided the conditions are satisfied. The operative direction was to dispose of all the appeals and pending applications accordingly.

What were the facts?

The appeals were filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Revenue) against various respondents (Assessees) including M/s Lambda Microwave Technologies, M/s Poly Lab Products, M/s Majestic Cab Products, M/s Gilvert Ispat, and M/s Shree Dhanwantri Herbals. The appeals concerned multiple assessment years and were consolidated for decision. The High Court of Himachal Pradesh was hearing these appeals. During the proceedings, counsel for the respondents informed the Court that the total amount involved in all these appeals was less than ₹20,00,000/-.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeals are to be disposed of in terms of Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10th December, 2015, issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board Direct Taxes, given that the total amount involved is less than ₹20,00,000/-. Assessee's Contention: The respondents (Assessees) argued that the appeals should be disposed of in accordance with the aforementioned circular, which provides for the disposal of appeals where the tax effect is below a certain threshold. They stated that the aggregate amount in dispute across all these appeals is less than ₹20,00,000/-, bringing them within the purview of the circular. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contention from the Revenue regarding the applicability of the circular or the amount in dispute. The Revenue is the appellant, and the appeals are being disposed of based on the respondent's submission and the circular.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

ITA No. ITA No. ITA No.

26 of 2010 26 of 2010 26 of 2010 a/w ITAs No. a/w ITAs No. a/w ITAs No. a/w ITAs No. 31, 31, 31, 31, 50, 51, 52 of 2010, 7, 15, 17, 32, 33 50, 51, 52 of 2010, 7, 15, 17, 32, 33 50, 51, 52 of 2010, 7, 15, 17, 32, 33 50, 51, 52 of 2010, 7, 15, 17, 32, 33 of 2012 & 4010 of 2013. of 2012 & 4010 of 2013. of 2012 & 4010 of 2013. of 2012 & 4010 of 2013. Date of Decision Date of Decision Date of Decision Date of Decision : : : : 25.02.2016 25.02.2016 25.02.2016 25.02.2016 _________________________________________________ Commissioner of Income Tax

…. …. …. ….Appellant Versus M/s Lambda Microwave Technologies ...Respondent

ITA ITA ITA ITAs No. 3 No. 3 No. 3 No. 31 of 2010 of 2010 of 2010 of 2010 & 15 of 2012 & 15 of 2012 & 15 of 2012 & 15 of 2012

Commissioner of Income Tax

…. …. …. ….Appellant(s) Versus M/s Poly Lab Products ….Respondent(s)

ITAs No. ITAs No. ITAs No. ITAs No. 50 & 50 & 50 & 50 & 51 51 51 51 of 201 of 201 of 201 of 2010

Commissioner of Income Tax

…. …. …. ….Appellant(s) Versus M/s Majestic Cab Products ….Respondent(s)

ITAs No. ITAs No. ITAs No. ITAs No. 7 & & & & 17 17 17 17 of 201 of 201 of 201 of 2012

Commissioner of Income Tax

…. …. …. ….Appellant(s) Versus M/s Gilvert Ispat

….Respondent(s)

ITAs No. ITAs No. ITAs No. ITAs No. 52 of 2010, 32, 33 of 2012 52 of 2010, 32, 33 of 2012 52 of 2010, 32, 33 of 2012 52 of 2010, 32, 33 of 2012 & & & & 4010 of 2013 4010 of 2013 4010 of 2013 4010 of 2013

Commissioner of Income Tax

…. …. …. ….Appellant(s) Versus M/s Shree Dhanwantri Herbals ….Respondent(s) _________________________________________________

2 Coram: The Hon’ble The Hon’ble The Hon’ble The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mr. Justice Mr. Justice Mr. Justice Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Chief Justice Chief Justice Chief Justice Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sureshwar Thakur Sureshwar Thakur Sureshwar Thakur Sureshwar Thakur, Judge. , Judge. , Judge. , Judge. Whether approved for reporting Whether approved for reporting Whether approved for reporting Whether approved for reporting? ? ? ?

For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Vinay Kuthiala, Senior Advocate with Ms. Vandana Kuthiala, Advocate.

For the Respondent(s) : Mr. K.D. Sood, Senior Advocate with Mr. Sanjeev Sood and Mr. Vishal Mohan, Advocates, for the respective respondents. __________________________________________________ Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Chief Justice Chief Justice Chief Justice Chief Justice (oral

Learned Counsel for the respondents stated at the Bar that the amount involved in all these appeals is less than ` 20,00,000/-, are to be disposed of in terms of the Circular No. 21/2015, dated 10th December, 2015, issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board Direct Taxes. Photostat copy of the circular is made part of the order.

Accordingly, the appeals are disposed of alongwith pending applications.

(Mansoor Ahmad Mir), Mansoor Ahmad Mir), Mansoor Ahmad Mir), Mansoor Ahmad Mir),

Chief Justice Chief Justice Chief Justice Chief Justice

(Sureshwar Thakur) Sureshwar Thakur) Sureshwar Thakur) Sureshwar Thakur)

Judge ge ge ge February 25, 2016. February 25, 2016. February 25, 2016. February 25, 2016. (hemlata)

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →