THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (CENTRAL,) vs. SHRI NAWAL KISHORE SONI,

ITA/7/2021HC RajasthanRJHC02008693202120 February 2025Bench: AVNEESH JHINGAN,ASHUTOSH KUMAR1 pages

AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the appeal filed by the Revenue should be dismissed as withdrawn. The reasoning provided is based on the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant (Revenue) that the tax effect involved in the appeal was under Rs.2 Crores. Consequently, the Revenue had specific instructions to withdraw the appeal in accordance with circular No.9 of 2024 dated 17.09.2024. The operative direction was to dismiss the appeal as withdrawn. No specific issues from the ITAT order were decided on merits by the High Court, and no part of the ITAT order was upheld or set aside. The principle that can be derived is that appeals with a tax effect below a certain threshold, as stipulated by CBDT circulars, may be withdrawn by the Revenue.

What were the facts?

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula (the Revenue) filed an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against an order dated 18.11.2019 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Chandigarh Bench ‘A’, Chandigarh, in ITA No.431/CHD/2019. The respondent in this appeal is M/s Haryana Power Generation Corporation Limited, Panchkula (the assessee). The appeal was filed before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh. The specific assessment year(s) and the amount in dispute were not explicitly stated in the provided text, other than the tax effect being under Rs.2 Crores. The procedural history involves the ITAT passing an order which was then challenged by the Revenue before the High Court.

What were the issues?

The primary issue before the High Court was whether the appeal filed by the Revenue should be entertained. The Revenue, through its learned counsel, submitted that the tax effect involved in the appeal was under Rs.2 Crores. Based on this fact, the Revenue stated that it had specific instructions to withdraw the appeal in view of circular No.9 of 2024 dated 17.09.2024 issued by the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, CBDT, Government of India. The judgment does not record any specific arguments from the assessee's side regarding the merits of the original ITAT order, as the appeal was withdrawn by the Revenue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

214-3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

ITA No.7 of 2021 (O&M)

Date of Decision: 26.09.2025

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula

…Appellant

Versus

M/s Haryana Power Generation Corporation Limited, Panchkula

…Respondent

CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA

Present:- Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Senior Standing Counsel and

Mr. Rana Gurtej Singh, Junior Standing Counsel,

for appellant-Income Tax Department.

Mr. Sandeep Goyal, Advocate

for respondent.

***** LISA GILL, J.(Oral) 1.

Present appeal has been filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against order dated 18.11.2019 passed by learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench ‘A’, Chandigarh, in ITA No.431/CHD/ 2019. 2.

Learned counsel for appellant submits that as the tax effect involved in this appeal is under Rs.2 Crores, he has specific instructions to withdraw this appeal in view of circular No.9 of 2024 dated 17.09.2024 issued by Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, CBDT, Government of India. 3.

Appeal is, accordingly, dismissed as withdrawn. 4.

Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of.

(LISA GILL)

JUDGE

26.09.2025

(MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA) neetu

JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No

Whether Reportable: Yes/No NEETU RANI 2025.09.30 10:17 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment PHHC, CHD

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →