THE PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3 LUDHIANA vs. M/S NIKKAMAL JEWELLERS 455, THE MALL LDH

PDF · subscribers
ITA/105/2018HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01118940201809 September 2019Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI,MR. JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The court granted the revenue the liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal, as prayed for by their counsel. The reasoning for the dismissal was solely based on the revenue's instruction to withdraw due to the tax effect falling below the monetary threshold stipulated in the relevant CBDT circulars. The operative direction was the dismissal of the appeal with liberty to revive. No issue was expressly left undecided, as the appeal was disposed of on the procedural ground of withdrawal.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-3, Ludhiana (the revenue) against M/s Nikkamal Jewellers (the assessee). The assessment year(s) are not specified in the provided text. The appeal challenges an order or action that is not detailed. The procedural history is that the revenue's counsel, citing CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018 and subsequent amendments, stated they had instructions to withdraw the appeal due to the tax effect being below the prescribed monetary limit. The revenue requested liberty to revive the appeal if circumstances changed.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to revive, based on the revenue's instructions and the applicable CBDT circulars. The revenue argued that the tax effect was below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018, as amended by Circular No. 17 of 2019 and Letter No. F.No.279/Misc/M-93/2018-ITJ dated 20.08.2019, and therefore, they had instructions to withdraw the appeal. They further prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal. The assessee's arguments are not recorded in the provided text.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

ITA No.105 of 2018 (O&M) 1 219 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No.105 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.105 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

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →