DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2(1) vs. ABHISHEK ATLANI

PDF · subscribers
TAXC/53/2019HC ChhattisgarhCGHC01025623201908 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 the submission made by the learned standing counsel for the Appellant (Revenue) that by virtue of the change of litigation policy notified by the Government as per Circular No. 17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019, the amount in dispute did not cross the minimum benchmark. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn. No decision was made on the merits of the substantial questions of law that were initially raised.

What were the facts?

The Revenue, represented by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Raipur, has 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 concerns ITA No. 185/RPR/2014. The Revenue is aggrieved by the ITAT's verdict and has raised several questions of law under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The matter came up 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, warranting consideration by the High Court. The Revenue's contention is that the appeal is preferred against the ITAT's verdict, raising various questions of law. However, the Revenue subsequently sought to withdraw the appeal. The reason provided for withdrawal is a change in litigation policy notified by the Government vide Circular No. 17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019, stating that the amount in dispute does not cross the minimum benchmark stipulated in the circular. The judgment does not record any specific arguments from the Respondent (assessee).

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. 53 of 2019 Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 2(1), Raipur (C.G.) ---- Appellant Versus Abhishek Atlani, Atlani Bungalow, Khamardih Road, Shankar Nagar, Raipur (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. 185/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 →