COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. AMARINDER SINGH

ITA/68/2003HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01042357200311 May 20162 pages

AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal as not pressed, granting liberty 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, the specific findings on the exclusion of income from the Prince Raninder Singh Trust, inherited properties, and other sources, as directed by the ITAT, were not adjudicated on merits by the High Court. The operative direction was the dismissal of the appeal as not pressed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue, Commissioner of Income-Tax, Patiala, filed an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against an order dated 9.10.2002 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Chandigarh Bench. The appeal pertained to assessment year 1994-95 and concerned the ITAT's direction to the Assessing Officer to exclude certain incomes from the assessee's individual assessment. These excluded incomes included income from Prince Raninder Singh Trust, income from properties inherited by the assessee, and income from other sources. The amount in dispute is not explicitly stated but is implied to be below a certain threshold for the Revenue to withdraw the appeal.

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 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 income from other sources from the assessee's income assessed in his individual status? The Revenue, through its counsel, submitted that in view of CBDT Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10.12.2015 read with Circular No. 279/Misc/M-142/2007-ITJ (Part) dated 8.3.2016, it did not wish to press the appeal as the tax effect involved was less than Rs. 20 lacs. The Revenue prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survived therein. No specific arguments were recorded for the assessee.

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. 587/Chandi/97, for the assessment year 1994- 95, 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 12:43 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 12:43 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →