DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. R K TRANSPORT AND CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATED LIMITED,

PDF · subscribers
TAXC/60/2019HC ChhattisgarhCGHC01024802201908 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 in 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 Consequently, the appeal was sought to be withdrawn. The Court, in its operative directions, dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. No specific findings were made on the merits of the ITAT's order, as the appeal was disposed of on procedural grounds of withdrawal.

What were the facts?

The Revenue, represented by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Raipur, 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. 242/RPR/2014. The assessee in this case is R.K. Transport & Constructions Pvt. Limited, Korba. The appeal raised several questions of law. The matter was listed for hearing on September 9, 2019.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal involves substantial questions of law under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Revenue contended that the appeal raises substantial questions of law. However, the Revenue subsequently sought to withdraw the appeal. The reason cited for withdrawal was a change in litigation policy notified by the Government through Circular No. 17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019, stating that the amount in dispute did not meet the minimum benchmark for filing such appeals. The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the 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. 60 of 2019 Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) ---- Appellant Versus R.K. Transport & Constructions Pvt. Limited, Beside CEAT Tyre, Transport Nagar, Korba (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. 242/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 →