PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, JALANDHAR vs. SH. GURPARSHOTAM SINGH

PDF · subscribers
ITA/102/2017HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01117285201731 July 2018Bench: MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA,LOK ADALAT BENCH - 31 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, granting liberty to the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for. The Court clarified that the withdrawal of the appeal by the revenue would not be considered an affirmation of the ITAT's order on merits. Furthermore, the legal issue, as claimed by the revenue, was left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. No finding on the merits of the case was rendered.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Jalandhar (revenue) against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The assessment year(s) are not explicitly stated. The amount in dispute is ₹37,11,786. The procedural history involves the revenue seeking to withdraw the appeal before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn by the revenue. (Question of procedure) Assessee's Contention: Not recorded. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, through its counsel, stated that due to the tax effect involved (₹37,11,786) and in view of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018 dated 11th July, 2018, it had instructions to withdraw the present appeal. The revenue prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survives therein.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No. 102 of 2017 (O&M) Decided on : 31.07.2018 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Jalandhar . . . Appellant(s) Versus Gurparshotam Singh . . . Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN PRESENT: Mr. Vivek Sethi, Sr. Standing Counsel for the appellant(s). Mr. Sachin Bhardwaj, Advocate and Mr. Divya Suri, Advocate for the respondent(s). **** AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (Oral) Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is ` 37,11,786/-, he has instructions to withdraw the present appeal in view of the circular No.03/2018, dated 11th July, 2018, issued by the C.B.D.T., New Delhi. However, he prayed that liberty be granted to the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal in case something survives therein. 2. Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. It is, however, clarified that withdrawal of the appeal by the revenue shall not be taken to be affirmation of order of the Tribunal on merits. Further, the legal issue as claimed by the revenue is being left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE July 31, 2018 J.Ram (AVNEESH JHINGAN) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No Jawala Ram 2018.08.04 13:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →