COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ROHTAK vs. SATYA PARKASH AGGARWAL & SONS (HUF), ROHTAK

PDF · subscribers
ITA/287/2014HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01109427201412 February 2024Bench: MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal. The Court acknowledged that the tax effect involved was Rs. 20,68,087, which is below the threshold of Rs. 50 lakhs stipulated in CBDT Circular No. 03/2018. The Court considered the submissions made and, keeping in view the provisions of the said Circular, concluded that the appeal should be dismissed. The operative direction was the dismissal of the appeal. No issues were expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The appeal, ITA-287-2014, was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Rohtak (appellant) against Satya Parkash Aggarwal & Sons (HUF), Rohtak (respondent) for assessment year(s) not specified. The appeal was initially dismissed as withdrawn on July 18, 2018, due to a tax effect below Rs. 50 lakhs, as per CBDT Circular No. 03/2018. However, an application for revival was filed based on audit objections, which was allowed on September 27, 2019, restoring the appeal. The revenue argued that despite the low tax effect, audit objections necessitated the appeal. The tax effect involved was Rs. 20,68,087.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal, despite having a tax effect of Rs. 20,68,087 (less than Rs. 50 lakhs), should be entertained by the High Court in light of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018, considering audit objections raised by the revenue? Assessee's contentions: Not recorded. Revenue's contentions: The revenue contended that although the tax effect was less than Rs. 50 lakhs, audit objections had been raised, which warranted the appeal being heard by the Court.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

2024:PHHC:021662-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 214 ITA-287-2014 (O&M) Date of Decision: February 12, 2024 Commissioner of Income Tax, Rohtak ......Appellant(s) Vs. Satya Parkash Aggarwal & Sons (HUF), Rohtak ......Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA Present: Ms.Gauri Neo Ramphal, Standing counsel for the appellant. Mr. Nitesh Bansal, Advocate for Mr. Sandeep Goyal, Advocate for the respondent ---- SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA.J. (ORAL) The instant appeal bearing ITA-287-2014 was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 18.07.2018, in view of the Circular No.03/2018 dated 11.07.2018, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, New Delhi, as the tax effect involved was less than Rs.50 lacs. However, it appears that application for revival of the appeal was filed on the basis of some audit objections. This Court allowed the application for revival vide order dated 27.09.2019 and the main case was restored to its original number. Accordingly, the matter was listed for hearing after obtaining orders from Hon’ble the Chief Justice, as per roster. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that although the tax effect involved is less than 50 lacs, however, audit raised objections and the revenue is before this Court. Sonia Arora 2024.02.15 17:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

ITA-287-2014 (O&M) --2-- 2024:PHHC:021662-DB ***** 3. We have considered the submission. Admittedly, tax effect involved is Rs.20,68,087/- and it does not come within the ambit of Rs.50 lacs or above. 4. Keeping in view, the provisions contained in Circular No.03/2018, dated 11th July 2018, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, New Delhi, the instant appeal is dismissed. 5. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE (SUDEEPTI SHARMA)

JUDGE February 12, 2024 sonia arora Whether speaking/reasoned: Speaking Whether reportable: Yes / No Sonia Arora 2024.02.15 17:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →