THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -4 vs. HOTLINE GLASS LTD.

PDF · subscribers
ITA/143/2017HC DelhiDLHC01167488201608 October 2018Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Delhi disposed of the appeal as not pressed. The Court took on record the statement made by the learned counsel for the appellant/Revenue that the tax effect in the present appeal was below Rs. 50,00,000/- and, in terms of Circular No. 3/2018 dated July 11, 2018, the Revenue would not press the appeal. The Court clarified that the issue/question raised was left open and was not decided. The operative direction was to dispose of the appeal as not pressed, with the clarification that the issue remained undecided.

What were the facts?

The appellant, Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-4 (Revenue), filed an appeal before the High Court of Delhi against an order concerning Hotline Glass Ltd. (Assessee). The appeal pertains to an assessment year not specified in the judgment. The Revenue stated that the tax effect in the present appeal was below Rs. 50,00,000/-. In accordance with Circular No. 3/2018 dated July 11, 2018, the Revenue decided not to press the appeal. The High Court took this statement on record.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as not pressed due to the tax effect being below the threshold stipulated in Circular No. 3/2018, thereby leaving the substantive issue undecided. The Revenue argued that the tax effect in the appeal was below Rs. 50,00,000/- and, in terms of Circular No. 3/2018, they would not press the appeal. They also clarified that the issue raised was left open and not decided. The judgment does not record any arguments from the Assessee.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 143/2017

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -4..... Appellant

Through: Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Advocate

versus

HOTLINE GLASS LTD.

..... Respondent Through: Mr. Sudhir K. Makkar, Senior Advocate with Ms. Meenakshi Singh & Mr. Abhishek Chaudhary, Advocates

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR

O R D E R %

08.10.2018

Learned counsel for the appellant/Revenue states that the tax effect in the present appeal is below Rs.50,00,000/- and hence, in terms of circular No.3/2018 dated 11.7.2018, the Revenue would not press the present appeal. However, it should be clarified that the issue/question raised is left open and is not decided.

Taking the statement on record, the appeal is disposed of as not pressed. We also clarify that we have not examined the issue/question raised, which is left open.

SANJIV KHANNA, J

CHANDER SHEKHAR, J OCTOBER 08, 2018 tp

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →