THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOM TAX 3 LDH vs. M/S NIKKAMAL JEWELLERS 455. THE MALL .LDH

PDF · subscribers
ITA/103/2018HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01118938201809 September 2019Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI,MR. JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The revenue's counsel stated they had instructions to withdraw the appeal because the tax effect involved was less than the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018, as amended. The revenue specifically prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal in case any aspect of the matter survived. The Court granted this liberty. Consequently, any pending Civil Miscellaneous Application (C.M. Application) was also disposed of as the main case was dismissed. The Court did not decide any substantive issue on the merits of the appeal.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-3, Ludhiana (the revenue) against M/s Nikkamal Jewellers, Ludhiana (the assessee). The assessment year(s) are not explicitly stated in the provided text. The appeal challenges an order or action from a lower authority, but the specific nature of that order and the authority that passed it are not detailed. The amount in dispute is also not specified. The procedural history relevant here is that the revenue's counsel, citing CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018 and subsequent amendments, sought to withdraw the appeal due to the tax effect being below the prescribed monetary limit.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn by the appellant-revenue, considering the tax effect is below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018, as amended. The appellant-revenue argued that due to the tax effect being less than the monetary limit stipulated in CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018, dated 11.07.2018, further amended vide Circular No. 17 of 2019, dated 08.08.2019, read with Letter No. F.No.279/Misc/M-93/2018-ITJ dated 20.08.2019, they had instructions to withdraw the present appeal. They prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survived therein. The respondent-assessee's arguments are not recorded in the provided text.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

ITA No.103 of 2018 (O&M) 1 219 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No.103 of 2018 (O&M) Date of decision : 09.09.2019 The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-3, Ludhiana ...... Appellant versus M/s Nikkamal Jewellers, 455 The Mall, Ludhiana ...... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL *** Present : Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Senior Standing Counsel with Ms. Pridhi Jaswinder Sandhu, Junior Standing Counsel for the appellant. Ms. Radhika Suri, Senior Advocate with Mr. M.S.Kanda, Advocate for the respondent.

*** AJAY TEWARI, J. (Oral) 1. Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is less than the monetary limit as prescribed in Circular No.3 of 2018 dated 11.07.2018 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, further amended vide Circular No.17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019 read with Letter No.F.No.279/Misc/M-93/2018-ITJ dated 20.08.2019, he has instructions to withdraw the present appeal. However, he prayed that liberty be granted to the appellant-revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal, in case something survives therein. 2. Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. POOJA SHARMA 2019.09.10 17:32 I am the author of this document

ITA No.103 of 2018 (O&M) 2 3. Since the main case has been dismissed, the pending C.M. Application, if any, also stands disposed of.

(AJAY TEWARI) JUDGE (HARNARESH SINGH GILL) JUDGE 09.09.2019 pooja sharma-I Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No POOJA SHARMA 2019.09.10 17:32 I am the author of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →