PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, UDAIPUR vs. M/S OM PRAKASH MAHESH KUMAR AND PARTY
What did the High Court hold?
The Tribunal granted the appellant's request to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn. The Tribunal explicitly stated that the formulated substantial question of law is kept open. The department was granted liberty to move an appropriate application for revival if the need arises. No decision on the merits of the case was made.
What were the facts?
This matter concerns the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Udaipur (the appellant/revenue) and M/s Om Prakash Mahesh Kumar & Party (the respondent/assessee). The appeal is filed against an order or action not specified in the judgment. The assessment year(s) are not mentioned. The procedural history is that the revenue filed an appeal before the High Court. The tax effect in the appeal is stated to be below Rupees Two Crores.
What were the issues?
The judgment does not record any formulated substantial question of law that the Tribunal had to decide. The appellant (revenue) sought permission to withdraw the appeal based on a circular of the Central Board of Direct Taxes dated 17.09.2024, citing the tax effect being below Rupees Two Crores. The respondent (assessee) did not present any arguments as the appeal was withdrawn by the appellant.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
[2024:RJ-JD:41579-DB] (1 of 1) [ITA-21/2018] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 21/2018 Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Udaipur. ----Appellant Versus M/s Om Prakash Mahesh Kumar & Party, Sirohi Jalore Group, Plot No. 4, Ujjawal Apartment, Bhatt Ji Ki Bari, Udaipur. ----Respondent For Appellant(s) : Mr. K.K. Bissa For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUNNURI LAXMAN Order 10/10/2024 1. The tax effect in appeal is below Rupees Two Crores, in view of the circular of Central Board of Direct Taxes dated 17.09.2024, learned counsel for the appellant seeks permission to withdraw the appeal. 2. The appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. 3. The formulated substantial question of law is kept open. 4. In case need arises, the department shall be at liberty to move appropriate application for revival. (MUNNURI LAXMAN),J (DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J 168-nirmala/- Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) (Uploaded on 17/10/2024 at 05:40:49 PM) (Downloaded on 28/10/2026 at 12:47:01 AM)
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Arun Aloysius Barnes vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Commercial TaxesKarnataka · 14 Oct 2026
- Gr Infra Projects Limited Ratlam Through Its Authorized Signatory Mr. Pankaj Das vs. The State Of Madhya PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 14 Oct 2026
- J M Mhatre Infra PVT. LTD Thr. Authorized Chetan J. Mhatre vs. Union Of INDIA Thr. Secretary Dept. Of Revenue Ministry Of Finance And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages PVT. LTD. vs. The Commissioner, CGST And Cx, Dibrugarh And AnrGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Shree Sushruta Health Services Private Limited vs. The Union Of INDIAPatna · 14 Oct 2026