DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, vs. A B S STEELS PVT. LTD

PDF · subscribers
TAXC/46/2019HC ChhattisgarhCGHC01024730201908 September 2019Author: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE,HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PARTH PRATEEM SAHU1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court granted permission to the Revenue to withdraw the appeal. The Court noted that the learned standing counsel for the appellant (Revenue) submitted that by virtue of the change of litigation policy notified by the Government vide Circular No. 17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019, the amount in dispute did not cross the minimum benchmark. Therefore, the Revenue sought to withdraw the appeal. The High Court, in light of this submission, dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. No decision was made on the merits of the ITAT's order. The principle derived is that appeals can be withdrawn by the Revenue if they no longer meet the criteria set by the litigation policy.

What were the facts?

The Revenue, represented by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Bhilai, filed an appeal before the High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur, against an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Raipur Bench. The appeal was filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, challenging the ITAT's decision in ITA No. 345/RPR/2014. The assessee is ABS Steels Pvt. Ltd. The appeal was listed for hearing before the Division Bench of the High Court.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue involves substantial questions of law under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Revenue's contention, as presented by the learned standing counsel, is that due to a change in the litigation policy, as notified by Circular No. 17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019, the amount in dispute does not meet the minimum benchmark prescribed for filing appeals. Consequently, the Revenue sought to withdraw the appeal. The judgment does not record any specific arguments from the assessee regarding the substantial questions of law or the merits of the ITAT's decision.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR TAXC No. 46 of 2019 Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle, Bhilai, District Durg (C.G.) ---- Appellant Versus ABS Steels Pvt. Ltd. 46 C Centre, Bhilai, District Durg (C.G.) ---- Respondent For Appellant : Shri Amit Chaudhary and Ms. Naushina Afrin, Advocates. Hon'ble Shri P. R. Ramachandra Menon, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Judgment on Board Per P. R. Ramachandra Menon, Chief Justice 09.09.2019

1.

This appeal has been preferred by the Revenue, on being aggrieved by the verdict passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Raipur Bench, Raipur (for short, 'ITAT') in ITA No. 345/RPR/2014 raising/suggesting various questions as involving substantial questions of law under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Today, when the matter came up for consideration, the learned standing counsel for the Appellant submits that by virtue of the change of litigation policy notified by the Government as per the Circular bearing No. 17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019, the amount in dispute does not cross the hurdle of minimum benchmark and in the said circumstance, the above appeal is sought to be withdrawn.

3.

In the said circumstances, permission is granted. This appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

(P. R. Ramachandra Menon) (Parth Prateem Sahu) Chief Justice Judge Brijmohan

More judgments on Section 260-A

All 2,570 judgments and leading authorities on Section 260-A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →