COMMR. OF INCOME TAX vs. AMANDEEP SINGH
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court dismissed the appeal as not pressed. The Revenue was granted liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survived therein. 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 concerning the limitation of the assessment order was expressly left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. Therefore, no finding was reached on the substantial question of law regarding the limitation period.
What were the facts?
The Revenue (Commissioner of Income Tax, Ludhiana-I) filed an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against an order dated June 28, 2005, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Chandigarh Bench. The ITAT's order pertained to the Block Assessment Period from April 1, 1987, to March 24, 1998. The appeal was filed against the respondent, Shri Amandeep Singh. The core of the dispute, as framed in the substantial question of law, revolved around whether the assessment order was barred by limitation, considering the date of a High Court judgment or the date of its receipt by the Department.
What were the issues?
1. Whether, on the facts and in law, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was legally justified in holding the assessment order as barred by limitation with reference to the date of the High Court's judgment or the date of receipt of the said order by the Department? The Revenue contended that it did not wish to press the present appeal in view of CBDT Circular No. 21/2015 dated December 10, 2015, read with Circular No. 279/Misc/M-142/2007-ITJ (Part) dated March 8, 2016, 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. The judgment does not record any specific arguments from the Assessee's side regarding the merits of the limitation issue.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 29.03.2016 Commissioner of Income Tax, Ludhiana-I, Ludhiana .......Appellant Versus Shri Amandeep Singh ......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARINDER SINGH SIDHU Present: Mr. Rajesh Katoch, 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 28.6.2005 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench (B), in IT (SS) A. No.63/CHD/2002, for the Block Asstt. Period from 1.4.87 to 24.3.98, raising the following substantial question of law: (i) Whether on the facts and law, the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was legally justified to hold the assessment order as barred by limitation with reference to the date of judgment of Hon'ble High Court's order or the date of receipt of the said order by the Department? REEMA SAINI 2016.04.04 13:52 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) 29.03.2016 JUDGE reema REEMA SAINI 2016.04.04 13:52 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Biswanath Rana vs. The Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Sushama Mishra vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Saudamini Samantray vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Bhubaneswar IiOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Keshav Rice Mill, Ganjam vs. Chief Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, KatakaOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Nanda Contruction PVT. LTD., Angul vs. Additional Commissioner, GST And Central Excise Commissionerate, SundergarhOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
