ORDER : SLP(C) No. 6289 of 2020 1. As requested by learned counsel for the Department, this matter is de-linked from the rest of the batch matters. 2. List this matter after the judgment is pronounced in SLP(C) No. 2906 of 2019 titled as "Income Tax Officer Vs. Vikram Sujit Kumar Bhatia". SLP (C) No. 18214/2017 3. This petition has been filed by the Department against the judgment and order dated 07.03.2017 passed by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in SCA No. 19437/2016, which had accepted the argument of the respondent regarding inappropriateness of the direction given in the circular issued by the Department to follow regime of call-book. 4. It is brought to our notice that in the main proceedings the demand of tax amount against the respondent was only Rs.1,00,75,528/-(Rupees One Crore Seventy-Five Thousand Five Hundred Twenty-Eight Only). As the adjudicated demand is less than the prescribed amount in terms of Circular No. 17/2019 (F.No.279/Misc.142/2007- ITJ(Pt.) dated 8th August, 2019 issued by the Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, the question of maintaining this special leave petition would not arise. 5. Mr. Balbir Singh, learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the Department, would, however, contend that the respondent being the assessee is likely to question the order dated 11.03.2016 passed by the Commissioner confirming the demand of central excise duty and in which appeal may agitate the issue regarding call- book. That apprehension need not detain the disposal of this matter. 6. To assuage the apprehension of the learned Additional Solicitor General, we make it clear that in the event, the respondent assessee prefers an appeal against the order-in-original No. AHM-EXCUS-003-COM-040-15-16 passed by the Commissioner dated 11.03.2016, the assessee would not be permitted to raise the ground about the correctness of the call-book regime specified in the stated circular. 7. In other words, the assessee can raise grounds independent of that contention. But if the assessee chooses to raise ground regarding call-book regime, that contention must await the outcome of the proceedings pending before this Court in the connected cases listed today. 8. Accordingly, the Appellate Authority ought to proceed with the appeal keeping in mind the aforementioned observation and on its own merits in accordance with law. But if the assessee chooses to raise ground regarding call-book regime, that contention must await the outcome of the proceedings pending before this Court in the connected cases listed today. 8. Accordingly, the Appellate Authority ought to proceed with the appeal keeping in mind the aforementioned observation and on its own merits in accordance with law. Further, the Appellate Authority shall decide the appeal uninfluenced by the finding or observation made by the High Court in the impugned judgment and order, including on the merits of the contention. 9. On this clear understanding, the special leave petition filed by the Department is being disposed of, leaving all questions open. 10. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. SLP(C) No. 399 of 2019 11. Mr. Charanjit Singh Bakshi, learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that the issue raised in this matter is similar to the case being SLP(C) No.18214/2017. That is not controverted by the opposite side. 12. In view of the above submission, this petition is disposed of on the same terms. 13. Rest of the matters 14. List these matters on 25.02.2022.