C.I.T .LDH. vs. -DO-

PDF · subscribers
ITR/128/1996HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01034929199630 October 2019Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI,MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court decided to dismiss the appeal as withdrawn. The court granted the Revenue the liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal, as prayed for. The reasoning for the withdrawal was based on the Revenue's submission that the tax effect was below the monetary limit stipulated in the relevant CBDT Circulars. The court found no impediment to one of its judges (Ajay Tewari, J.) hearing the matter, despite having previously been counsel for the respondent-assessee, as the withdrawal was based on a CBDT Circular. The pending Civil Miscellaneous Application, if any, was also disposed of as the main case had been decided.

What were the facts?

This case involves an appeal filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ludhiana (the Revenue) against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Division Bench, Chandigarh, dated February 24, 1995, in ITA No.130/Chandi/1990. The respondent is M/s. Steel Strips Limited, Chandigarh (the assessee). The High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh was hearing the appeal. The Revenue sought to withdraw the appeal, citing a CBDT Circular concerning monetary limits for filing appeals. The Revenue also requested liberty to revive the appeal if circumstances warranted.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Revenue is permitted to withdraw the appeal in light of CBDT Circular No.3 of 2018 and subsequent amendments, and if so, whether liberty should be granted to revive the appeal. The Revenue argued that the tax effect involved in the appeal was below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No.3 of 2018, as amended by Circular No.17 of 2019 and Letter No.F. No.279/Misc/M-93/2018-ITJ dated 20.08.2019. Consequently, the Revenue had instructions to withdraw the appeal. The Revenue further prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if any aspect of the matter survived. The judgment does not record any specific arguments from the assessee regarding the withdrawal or the liberty to revive.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

422 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITR No.128 of 1996 Date of decision : 30.10.2019 The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ludhiana ...... Appellant versus M/s. Steel Strips Limited, Chandigarh. ...... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE ALKA SARIN *** Present : Ms.Urvashi Dhugga, Advocate for the appellant. Mr.Akshay Bhan, Sr. Advocate with Mr.Alok Mittal, Advocate and Mr.Shantanu, Bansal, Advocate for the respondent. *** AJAY TEWARI, J. (Oral) It has been brought to our notice that one of us (Ajay Tewari, J.) had been the counsel of the respondent-assessee but the counsel for the appellant has pointed out that she wishes to withdraw this case in lieu of the Circular of CBDT and therefore no disability attaches to Ajay Tewari, J. in allowing the withdrawal. We find this to be indeed so. 2. This appeal has been filed against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Division Bench, Chandigarh in ITA No.130/Chandi/1990 dated 24.02.1995. 3. Learned counsel for the Appellant-Revenue states that since the tax effect involved is less than the monetary limit as prescribed in Circular No.3 of 2018 dated 11.07.2018 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, further amended vide Circular No.17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019 read with Letter No.F. No.279/Misc/M-93/2018-ITJ dated 20.08.2019, she has instructions to withdraw the present appeal. However, she has prayed that liberty be granted to the Revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal, in case something survives therein. RAMAN KUMAR 2019.11.14 10:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

-2- 4. Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. 5. Since the main case has been decided, the pending Civil Misc. Application, if any, also stands disposed of (AJAY TEWARI) JUDGE (ALKA SARIN) JUDGE 30.10.2019 raman Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No RAMAN KUMAR 2019.11.14 10:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →