PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 CHANDIGARH vs. M/S SAGAR EDUTECH PVT LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA/230/2016HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01110425201614 July 2017Bench: MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA,LOK ADALAT BENCH - 32 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The court granted the liberty to the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for. It was clarified that the withdrawal of the appeal by the revenue would not be considered an affirmation of the Tribunal's order on merits. Furthermore, the legal issue, as claimed by the revenue, was left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. No specific finding was given on the merits of the case.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Chandigarh (the revenue) against M/s Sagar Edutech Pvt. Ltd. (the assessee). The assessment year(s) are not explicitly stated. The appeal challenges an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). During the proceedings before the High Court, the revenue's counsel presented a communication indicating that the tax effect in the instant case was calculated to be ₹17,73,536/-. This amount was stated to be below the monetary limit prescribed by the CBDT circular No. 21/2015, dated 10.12.2015.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn by the revenue, given the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limit for filing appeals. The revenue argued that the tax effect involved in the appeal is ₹17,73,536/-, which is less than ₹20 lacs. Therefore, in accordance with CBDT circular No. 21/2015, dated 10.12.2015, the revenue has instructions to withdraw the present appeal. The revenue also prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survives therein. The assessee's arguments are not recorded in the judgment.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

ITA No. 230 of 2016 (O&M) Decided on : 14.07.2017 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Chandigarh . . . Appellant Versus M/s Sagar Edutech Pvt. Ltd. . . . Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN PRESENT: Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Sr. Standing Counsel for the appellant-revenue. Mr. B.M. Monga, Advocate and Mr. Rohit Kaura, Advocate for the respondent-assessee. **** AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (Oral) Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue has produced a communication dated 13.07.2017 along with a departmental letter dated 10.07.2017, received by her from the Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Chandigarh, in Court today, which is taken on record, subject to all just exceptions. In Para 4 of the aforesaid letter dated 10.07.2017, it has been stated that after re-calculating quantum of tax effect, it has been found that the tax effect involved in the instant case is `17,73,536/-. 2. It was submitted that since the tax effect involved in the present appeal is less than ` 20 lacs, the monetary limit prescribed by the C.B.D.T, New Delhi, vide circular No. 21/2015, dated 10.12.2015, therefore, she has instructions to withdraw the present appeal. However, she prayed that liberty be granted to the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal in case something survives therein. Jawala Ram 2017.07.18 14:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

ITA No. 230 of 2016 (O&M) - 2 - 3. 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 (AVNEESH JHINGAN) July 14, 2017 JUDGE J.Ram

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No Jawala Ram 2017.07.18 14:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →