THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, AMRITSAR vs. M/S R.K.M. INTERNATIONAL, 8, G.T. ROAD, MODEL TOWN, AMRITSAR (PAN: AAEFR4798N)

PDF · subscribers
ITA/110/2018HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01118946201813 August 2018Bench: MR. JUSTICE R.C. KATHURIA (RETD.),MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, granting the revenue the liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for.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 Tribunal's order on merits. Furthermore, the legal issue claimed by the revenue was left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. No decision was made on the merits of the case.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Amritsar (the revenue) against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The respondent is M/s R.K.M. International. The tax effect involved in the appeal was ₹ 20,51,213/-. The appeal was decided on August 13, 2018, by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the revenue should be dismissed as withdrawn in view of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018 dated 11th July, 2018, considering the tax effect involved. Contentions: Assessee: No specific contentions are recorded for the assessee in the judgment. Revenue: The learned counsel for the appellant-revenue stated that due to the tax effect being ₹ 20,51,213/-, they had instructions to withdraw the appeal in accordance with CBDT Circular No. 03/2018. They prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survived.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No. 110 of 2018 Decided on : 13.08.2018 Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Amritsar . . . Appellant(s) Versus M/s R.K.M. International . . . Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN PRESENT: Mr. Denesh Goyal, Sr. Standing Counsel for the appellant(s). **** AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (Oral) Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is ` 20,51,213/-, 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 August 13, 2018 J.Ram (AVNEESH JHINGAN) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No JAWALA RAM 2018.08.14 16:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →