C I T vs. VASUDHA MUNJAL

PDF · subscribers
ITA/609/2008HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01080616200825 April 2016Author: MR. JUSTICE RAMENDRA JAIN,MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN2 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, no finding was given on the substantial question of law raised by the revenue, and the ITAT's order was not affirmed or reversed on merits.

What were the facts?

The Revenue, Commissioner of Income-Tax, Ludhiana-II, filed an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against an order dated January 29, 2008, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Chandigarh Bench (A). The ITAT's order pertained to the assessment year 2001-02 and had quashed an order passed by the Assessing Officer under Sections 143/263 of the Act, following a direction from the Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Ludhiana, under Section 263. The appeal was filed by the Revenue challenging the ITAT's decision.

What were the issues?

1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT was right in law in quashing the order passed by the Assessing Officer under Sections 143/263 of the Act by following the direction of the Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Ludhiana, under Section 263 of the Act? The appellant-revenue's contention was that they did not wish to press the present appeal in view of Circular No. 21/2015 dated December 10, 2015, read with Circular No. 279/Misc/M-142/2007-ITJ (Part) dated March 8, 2016, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, 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. No arguments were recorded for the respondent-assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A,Section 143,Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 25.04.2016 Commissioner of Income-Tax, Ludhiana-II .......Appellant Versus Miss Vasudha Munjal ......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 29.1.2008 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench (A), in ITA No. 750/Chandi/2007, for the assessment year 2001-02, raising the following substantial question of law: Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT was right in law quashing the order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143/263 of the Act by following the direction of Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Ludhiana u/s 263 of the Act? REEMA SAINI 2016.04.28 10:28 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) 25.04.2016 JUDGE reema REEMA SAINI 2016.04.28 10:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →