PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S VISHAL GEMS INTERNATIONAL

ITA/25/2021HC RajasthanRJHC02009160202111 March 2025Bench: AVNEESH JHINGAN,MANEESH SHARMA1 pages

AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court decided to dispose of the appeal as withdrawn. The reasoning provided was that the assessee had already availed of the Vivad Se Vishwas Act/Scheme. Consequently, the Revenue's counsel informed the Court that they had instructions not to pursue the instant appeal. The High Court accepted this submission and disposed of the appeal accordingly. No specific findings on the merits of the original tax dispute were made, as the appeal was withdrawn before any substantive adjudication. The operative direction was to dispose of the appeal as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ludhiana against an order concerning Shri Sanjay Jain. The assessment year(s) are not specified in the judgment. The appeal challenges an order passed by an Income Tax authority, the specifics of which are not detailed. The procedural history leading to this appeal is not elaborated upon, other than the fact that the appeal is before the High Court. The amount in dispute is not mentioned. The case was listed for hearing before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh.

What were the issues?

The High Court had to decide whether to proceed with the appeal. The appellant (Revenue) argued that the assessee had availed of the Vivad Se Vishwas Act/Scheme, and therefore, the Revenue had instructions not to pursue the appeal. The respondent (assessee) did not present any arguments as the appeal was being withdrawn by the Revenue. The core issue was whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn based on the assessee's participation in the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

108(3) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-25-2021(O&M)

Date of Decision:24.08.2022 The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ludhiana

....... Appellant

versus Shri Sanjay Jain

...... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MANCHANDA *** Present: Mr.Rajesh Katoch, Senior Standing Counsel assisted by Ms. Pridhi Jaswinder Sandhu, Junior Standing Counsel for the appellant. *** TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA,

J. (ORAL)

Mr.Rajeh Katoch, learned Senior Standing Counsel at the very outset informs the Court that the assessee has already availed of the Vivad Se Vishwas Act/Scheme and as such he has instructions not to pursue the instant appeal. Disposed of as withdrawn. (TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA) JUDGE (DEEPAK MANCHANDA) JUDGE 24.08.2022 sunita Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No SUNITA NAGPAL 2022.08.25 14:12 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →