COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR vs. KEDAR NATH SINGHNIA

PDF · subscribers
ITA/332/2007HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01073027200723 January 2017Bench: MR. JUSTICE RAMENDRA JAIN,MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn.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 No specific finding was given on the merits of the case, as the appeal was withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar-II (the revenue) against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The assessee is Kedar Nath Singhania. The judgment does not specify the assessment year(s) or the specific order of the ITAT under challenge. During the proceedings, the revenue's counsel submitted an affidavit stating that the tax effect involved in the appeal was calculated to be ₹11,98,346/-. This amount was found to be below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 21/2015, dated 10.12.2015, for filing appeals.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be withdrawn by the revenue based on the tax effect being below the prescribed monetary limit. The revenue argued that based on the recalculated tax effect of ₹11,98,346/-, which is less than ₹20,00,000/- as per CBDT Circular No. 21/2015, they had instructions to withdraw the present appeal. They further prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survives therein. The judgment does not record any arguments from the assessee's side.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

ITA No. 332 of 2007

Decided on : 23.01.2017 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar-II, Jalandhar . . . Appellant Versus Kedar Nath Singhania . . . Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMENDRA JAIN PRESENT: Mr. Vivek Sethi, Advocate for the appellant-revenue. Mr. Rajiv Sharma, Advocate for the respondent-assessee. **** AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (Oral) Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue has produced an affidavit of Sh. Ajay Pal Singh, Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Jalandhar, in Court today, which is taken on record, subject to all just exceptions. In Para 4 of the aforesaid affidavit, it has been stated that after re-calculating quantum of tax effect, it has been found that the tax effect, in terms of C.B.D.T. Circular No.21/2015, involved in the instant case is `11,98,346/-. 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, he has instructions to withdraw the present appeal. However, he prayed that liberty be granted to the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal in case something survives therein. Jawala Ram 2017.01.25 16:05 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

ITA No. 332 of 2007 - 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 (RAMENDRA JAIN) January 23, 2017 JUDGE J.Ram

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No Jawala Ram 2017.01.25 16:05 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →