COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. AMARINDER SINGH

ITA/67/2003HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01037322200311 May 2016Author: THE TAXING OFFICER,MR. JUSTICE SATPAL2 pages

AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal as not pressed, with liberty granted to the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for. The Court clarified that the withdrawal of the appeal by the revenue would not be taken as an affirmation of the Tribunal's order on merits. The legal issue, as claimed by the revenue, was left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. Therefore, no decision was rendered on the merits of the substantial questions of law raised in the appeal concerning the exclusion of income from the Prince Raninder Singh Trust, inherited properties, and other sources from the assessee's individual assessment.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income-Tax, Patiala (appellant-revenue) against an order dated 09.10.2002 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Chandigarh Bench, in ITA No. 586/Chandi/97, for the assessment year 1993-94. The ITAT had directed the Assessing Officer to exclude certain incomes from the assessee's (Sh. Amarinder Singh) individual assessment. These excluded incomes pertained to the Prince Raninder Singh Trust, properties inherited by the assessee, and income from other sources. The appeal was filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

What were the issues?

1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT was right in law in directing the Assessing Officer to exclude the income of Prince Raninder Singh Trust from the assessee's income assessed in his individual status? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT was right in law in directing the Assessing Officer to exclude the income from properties inherited by the assessee from the assessee's income assessed in his individual status? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT was right in law in directing the Assessing Officer to exclude the income from other sources from the assessee's income assessed in his individual status? The appellant-revenue, through its counsel, submitted that in view of Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10.12.2015 and Circular No. 279/Misc/M-142/2007-ITJ (Part) dated 08.03.2016 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, it did not wish to press the present appeal as the tax effect involved was less than ₹ 20 lacs. The revenue prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survived therein.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 11.05.2016 The Commissioner of Income-Tax, Patiala .......Appellant Versus Sh.Amarinder Singh ......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARINDER SINGH SIDHU Present: Mr. Zora Singh Klar, Advocate for the appellant. RAJESH BINDAL,J. This appeal has been filed under Section 260 A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'), against the order dated 9.10.2002 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench (A) Chandigarh, in ITA No. 586/Chandi/97, for the assessment year 1993- 94, raising the following substantial question of law: Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT was right in law in directing the Assessing Officer to exclude the income of Prince Raninder Singh Trust, income from properties inherited by the assessee and income from other sources, from the assessee's income assessed in his individual status? REEMA SAINI 2016.05.18 11:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh -2- Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue submitted that in view of circular No.21/2015 dated 10.12.2015 read with circular No.279/Misc/M-142/2007-ITJ (Part) dated 8.3.2016, issued by Central Board of Direct Taxes, he does not wish to press the present appeal, as the tax effect involved is less than ` 20 lacs. However, he prays that liberty be granted to the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal in case something survives therein. Dismissed as not pressed with liberty as prayed for. It is however, clarified that withdrawal of the appeal by the revenue shall not be taken as affirmation of order of the Tribunal on merits. The legal issue as claimed by the revenue is left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. (RAJESH BINDAL)

JUDGE (HARINDER SINGH SIDHU) 11.05.2016 JUDGE reema REEMA SAINI 2016.05.18 11:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →