CIT-III LUDHIANA vs. M/S MALWA INDUSTRIES LTD.

PDF · subscribers

ITA/47/2010HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01093406201007 February 2019Author: MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL,MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL1 pages

AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The court granted liberty to the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survives therein. It was clarified that the withdrawal of the appeal by the revenue would not be taken as an affirmation of the order of the Tribunal on merits. Furthermore, the legal issue as claimed by the revenue was left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. The court did not decide the merits of the case.

What were the facts?

The appeal, ITA No. 47 of 2010, was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax-III, Ludhiana (appellant-revenue) against M/s Malwa Industries Ltd. (respondent-assessee). The judgment was decided on February 7, 2019. The tax effect involved in the case was stated to be ₹20,77,800/-. This amount was less than the monetary limit of ₹50,00,000/- fixed by the CBDT circular No. 03/2018, dated July 11, 2018, for filing appeals in the High Courts. The assessee was not represented before the High Court.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the revenue is maintainable given the tax effect involved is below the monetary limit prescribed by the CBDT circular? The revenue argued that the tax effect involved in the present case is less than the monetary limit fixed by the CBDT, and therefore, it has instructions to withdraw the present appeal. The revenue prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal in case something survives therein. No arguments were recorded for the assessee.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No. 47 of 2010 Decided on : 07.02.2019 Commissioner of Income Tax-III, Ludhiana . . . Appellant(s) Versus M/s Malwa Industries Ltd. . . . Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL PRESENT: Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Sr. Standing Counsel for the appellant-revenue. None for the respondent-assessee. **** AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (Oral) As per communication dated 06/07.12.2018, addressed by the Income Tax Officer (Hq.)(Judl.), Office of the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-3, Ludhiana to the learned Sr. Standing Counsel, which is already taken on record in connected matter i.e. ITA No. 46 of 2010, the tax effect involved in the present case has been shown as `20,77,800/- and therefore, it is less than the monetary limit of ` 50,00,000/- fixed by the C.B.D.T., New Delhi, vide circular No. 03/2018, dated 11th July, 2018, for filing the appeals in the High Courts.

In view thereof, learned counsel for the revenue states that since the tax effect involved in the present case is less than the monetary limit fixed by the C.B.D.T., therefore, he has instructions to withdraw the present present appeal. He, however, prayed that liberty be granted to the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal in case something survives therein.

Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. It is, however, clarified that withdrawal of the appeal by the revenue shall not be taken to be affirmation of order of the Tribunal on merits. Further, the legal issue as claimed by the revenue is being left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE February 07, 2019 J.Ram (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No JAWALA RAM 2019.02.11 16:12 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →