PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-7 vs. PVR LTD.

PDF · subscribers
ITA/582/2018HC DelhiDLHC01114335201828 November 2018Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the appeal without examining or answering the question/issue raised. The Court took on record the statement made by the learned counsel for the appellant/revenue that the tax effect in the appeal is below Rs. 50 lacs. In terms of Circular No. 3 of 2018, the appeal was disposed of without answering the issue. The issue/question of law has been left open. Liberty was granted to the Revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal if it is found that the matter is covered by an exception. The finding is based on the administrative instruction and not on the merits of the substantive issue.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-7 (Revenue) against PVR Ltd. (Assessee). The assessment year(s) are not specified. The appeal challenges an order or action, the nature of which is not detailed. The procedural history is that the Revenue's counsel stated that the tax effect in the present appeal is below Rs. 50 lacs. Consequently, in terms of Circular No. 3 of 2018 dated July 11, 2018, the Revenue requested the appeal be disposed of without answering the issue raised. The High Court took this statement on record.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be disposed of without answering the issue raised, given that the tax effect is below Rs. 50 lacs, as per Circular No. 3 of 2018. (Question of procedure/administrative policy). Assessee's Contention: Not recorded. Revenue's Contention: The tax effect in the appeal is below Rs. 50 lacs, and therefore, in terms of Circular No. 3 of 2018, the appeal may be disposed of without answering the issue. The Revenue relied on Circular No. 3 of 2018.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 582/2018 PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-7 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Asheesh Jain, Sr. Standing Counsel. versus PVR LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Salil Kapoor and Ms. Soumya Singh, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI O R D E R % 28.11.2018 Learned counsel for the appellant/revenue states that the tax effect in the present appeal is below Rs.50 lacs and hence, in terms of the Circular No.3 of 2018 dated 11.07.2018, the present appeal may be disposed of without answering/examining the issue and question raised. It may be clarified that the issue/question of law has been left open. Taking the statement on record, we dispose of the present appeal without examining the question/issue raised, which is left open. Liberty is granted to the Revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal in case it is found that the matter is covered by an exception. SANJIV KHANNA, J. ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI, J. NOVEMBER 28, 2018/uj

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →