COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX I vs. ENVIRO CONTROL ASSOCIATED PVT LTD

PDF · subscribers
TAXAP/1014/2013HC GujaratGJHC24043574201314 November 2019Bench: HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI,HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SANGEETA K. VISHEN2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal noted that the learned senior standing counsel for the appellant (Revenue) stated that the tax effect involved in the appeal is less than Rs. 1,00,00,000/-. In light of Circular No. 17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019, which stipulates that no appeal with a tax effect not exceeding Rs. 1,00,00,000/- shall be filed before the High Court and which is retrospectively applicable to pending appeals, the Revenue's counsel stated that they do not press the present appeal. Therefore, the appeal was disposed of as not pressed. The High Court also clarified that if there is any error in the computation of the tax effect or if the Circular is not applicable for any reason, the appellant would be at liberty to seek revival of the appeal. No specific finding on the merits of the original dispute was made.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax I (the Revenue) against Enviro Control Associated Pvt Ltd (the assessee). The assessment year(s) are not specified. The order or action under challenge is the appeal itself, which was filed before the High Court. The procedural history involves the Revenue's counsel stating that the tax effect in the appeal is less than Rs. 1,00,00,000/-. This statement was made in light of Circular No. 17 of 2019, dated August 8, 2019, issued by the CBDT, which mandates that appeals with a tax effect not exceeding Rs. 1,00,00,000/- should not be filed before the High Court and is retrospectively applicable to pending appeals.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the present appeal, where the tax effect is less than Rs. 1,00,00,000/-, should be pressed before the High Court, considering Circular No. 17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019. The Revenue's contention, as presented by its learned senior standing counsel, is that the tax effect in the appeal is below the monetary limit specified in Circular No. 17 of 2019. Consequently, the Revenue does not press the appeal. The judgment does not record any specific arguments from the assessee's side regarding this issue.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

C/TAXAP/1014/2013 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 1014 of 2013 ========================================================== COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX I Versus ENVIRO CONTROL ASSOCIATED PVT LTD ========================================================== Appearance: MRS KALPANAK RAVAL(1046) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MR B S SOPARKAR(6851) for the Opponent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI and HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SANGEETA K. VISHEN

Date : 14/11/2019 ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI) 1. Heard Mrs. Kalpana K. Raval, learned senior standing counsel for the appellant and Mr. B. S. Soparkar, learned advocate for the respondent. 2. Mrs. Kalpana K. Raval, learned senior standing counsel for the appellant, has stated that the tax effect involved in this appeal is less than Rs.1,00,00,000/-. Under the circumstances, in the light of the Circular No.17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019 issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Direct Taxes, which provides that no appeal wherein the tax effect does not exceed the monetary limit of Rs.1,00,00,000/- shall be filed before the High Court and which has also been made retrospectively applicable to Page 1 of 2

C/TAXAP/1014/2013 ORDER pending appeals, the learned senior standing counsel for the appellant does not press the present appeal. 3. The appeal is, accordingly, disposed of as not pressed in light of the Circular dated 08.08.2019. However, in case there is any error in the computation of the tax effect involved or if, for any reason, the Circular is not applicable, it would be open for the appellant to seek revival of the appeal. (HARSHA DEVANI, J) (SANGEETA K. VISHEN,J) RAVI P. PATEL Page 2 of 2

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →