THE COMMI. OF IT, FARIDABAD vs. RAVINDER SINGHAL

PDF · subscribers
ITA/113/2011HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01095425201117 July 2018Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL,MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN1 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The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, granting the revenue the liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for.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 ITAT's order on merits. Furthermore, the legal issue claimed by the revenue was explicitly left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. The decision is based on the revenue's instruction to withdraw due to the tax effect and the CBDT circular, rather than a decision on the substantive merits of the case.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad (appellant-revenue) against Shri Ravinder Singhal (respondent-assessee). The appeal challenged an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The tax effect involved in the appeal was ₹26,57,983. The revenue sought to withdraw the appeal in view of Circular No. 03/2018 dated 11th July, 2018, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT). The revenue also requested liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survived therein.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn based on the tax effect and CBDT Circular No. 03/2018. The revenue argued that due to the tax effect being below the threshold stipulated in the CBDT circular, they had instructions to withdraw the appeal. They also requested liberty to revive the appeal. The assessee's arguments are not recorded in the judgment. The core issue revolves around the application of the CBDT circular for withdrawal of appeals based on monetary limits.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-113-2011 Date of Decision: 17.7.2018 Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad ...Appellant. Versus Shri Ravinder Singhal ...Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN. PRESENT: Mr. Arun Sharma, Advocate for Mr. Tajender K. Joshi, Sr. Standing Counsel for the appellant. Mr. Sanjay Bansal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Amit Parshad, Advocate for the respondent. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is ` 26,57,983/-, he has instructions to withdraw the present appeal in view of Circular No.03/2018, dated 11th July, 2018, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, New Delhi. However, he has 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 17, 2018 (AVNEESH JHINGAN) gbs JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Gurbachan Singh 2018.07.19 11:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →