PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 2 vs. M/S. CIMMCO LTD.

PDF · subscribers
ITA/4/2018HC DelhiDLHC01498221201720 September 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 disposed of the appeal based on the statement made by the Revenue's counsel. The Revenue stated that the tax effect was below Rs. 50,00,000/- and requested disposal in terms of Circular No. 3/2018. The Court recorded this statement and disposed of the appeal without answering the substantial question of law. It was clarified that the issue raised in the appeal was left open. The reasoning is administrative, based on the revenue's instructions and circulars regarding monetary limits for filing appeals. The ratio is that appeals with a tax effect below a certain threshold, as per administrative instructions, can be withdrawn or disposed of without adjudication on merits, leaving the underlying issue undecided.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax – 2 (Revenue) against M/s. Cimmco Ltd. (Assessee). The assessment year(s) are not specified in the judgment. The appeal challenges an order or action from an unspecified authority. The procedural history indicates that the Revenue, through its counsel, stated that the tax effect in the present appeal is below Rs. 50,00,000/-. This statement was made as per instructions dated 13.9.2018 and in terms of Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.7.2018. The Revenue requested that the appeal be disposed of without adjudicating the substantial question of law.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be disposed of without adjudicating the substantial question of law, given that the tax effect is below the threshold specified in Circular No. 3/2018? (Question of procedure/administrative policy) Assessee's Contentions: Not recorded in the judgment. Revenue's Contentions: The Revenue contended that as per instructions dated 13.9.2018 and Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.7.2018, the tax effect in the appeal is below Rs. 50,00,000/-. Therefore, the appeal may be disposed of without adjudicating the substantial question of law, leaving the issue open.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 4/2018

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX – 2 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Deepak Anand, Junior Standing Counsel

versus

M/S. CIMMCO LTD.

..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rahul Chaudhary, Mr. Deepak Biswas & Mr. Karanjot Singh Mainee, Advocates

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

O R D E R %

20.09.2018

Learned counsel for the appellant/Revenue states that, as per instructions dated 13.9.2018, the tax effect in the present appeal is below Rs.50,00,000/-. Hence, the present appeal may be disposed of, in terms of circular No.3/2018 dated 11.7.2018, without adjudicating the substantial question of law. It may be clarified that the issue raised is left open.

Recording the said statement, the appeal is disposed of, without answering the substantial question of law. It is also clarified that the issue raised is left open.

SANJIV KHANNA, J

CHANDER SHEKHAR, J SEPTEMBER 20, 2018/tp

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →