PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) GURGAON vs. MOHINDER KAUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA/113/2017HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01117297201705 September 2019Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI,MR. JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the revenue as withdrawn, granting the liberty as prayed for by the revenue to revive the appeal if circumstances warranted. In view of the order passed in the main appeal, the High Court allowed the cross-objection to be withdrawn as prayed for by the respondent. Any pending C.M. Application was also disposed of as the main case was dismissed. The ratio decidendi is that appeals can be withdrawn by the revenue based on monetary limits prescribed by CBDT circulars, with liberty to revive if new facts or circumstances emerge.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Gurgaon (the revenue) against an order concerning Smt. Mohinder Kaur, Legal Heir of Late Sh. Tranjit Singh. The assessment year(s) are not explicitly stated. The revenue sought to withdraw the appeal citing the tax effect being below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018 and Circular No. 17 of 2019. The revenue requested liberty to revive the appeal if circumstances changed. A cross-objection was also filed by the respondent. The High Court was hearing both the appeal and the cross-objection.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the revenue should be dismissed as withdrawn, considering the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limits and the revenue's request to withdraw with liberty to revive. Assessee's Contention: The respondent's counsel stated they did not wish to press the cross-objection and sought permission to withdraw it, given the order in the main appeal. Revenue's Contention: The revenue's counsel, citing CBDT Circulars No. 3 of 2018 and 17 of 2019, stated they had instructions to withdraw the appeal as the tax effect was below the monetary limit. They prayed for liberty to revive the appeal if something survived.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

ITA No.113 of 2017 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH XOBJC No.131-CII-2017 in/and ITA No.113 of 2017 (O&M) Date of decision : 05.09.2019 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Gurgaon ...... Appellant versus Smt. Mohinder Kaur, Legal heir of Late Sh.Tranjit Singh, H.No.694, Sec.8 Chandigarh ...... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL *** Present :- Mr. Yogesh Putney, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Divya Suri, Advocate Mr. Sachin Bhardwaj, Advocate Mr. Gaurav Singh Bisht, Advocate for the cross objector-respondent.

*** AJAY TEWARI, J. (Oral) ITA No.113 of 2017 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. POOJA SHARMA 2019.09.10 13:15 I am the author of this document

ITA No.113 of 2017 (O&M) 2 2. Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. XOBJC No.131-CII-2017 3. In view of the order passed in the main case, learned counsel for the cross objector-respondent states that he does not want to press the the cross objection and prays for permission to withdraw the same. 4. Allowed as prayed for. Dismissed as withdrawn. 5. 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 05.09.2019 pooja sharma-I Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No POOJA SHARMA 2019.09.10 13:15 I am the author of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →