THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III LUDHIANA vs. M/S A-ONE COMMUNICATION, OLD DASHEHRA GROUND MOGA
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The court granted the liberty to the appellant-revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal, as prayed for by their counsel. The reasoning for dismissal was based on the revenue's submission that the tax effect was below the monetary limit for filing appeals, as per the relevant CBDT circulars. The court also noted that since the main case was dismissed, any pending C.M. (Civil Miscellaneous application) also stood disposed of. No specific issue was decided on merits.
What were the facts?
The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax III, Ludhiana (appellant-revenue) against M/s. A-One Communication (respondent). The assessment year(s) are not specified in the provided text. The appeal challenges an order or action from an unspecified authority. The tax effect involved is stated to be less than the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018 and Circular No. 17 of 2019, read with a letter dated 20.08.2019. The revenue's counsel stated they had instructions to withdraw the appeal.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn by the appellant-revenue, considering the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limit for appeals, as per CBDT Circulars No. 3 of 2018 and 17 of 2019. Contentions: Assessee: No arguments recorded as none appeared. Revenue: The revenue argued that since the tax effect is less than the monetary limit prescribed by the CBDT circulars, they have instructions to withdraw the present appeal. They also prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survives therein.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 970 ITA No.114 of 2013 (O&M) Date of decision : 09.09.2019 The Commissioner of Income Tax III Ludhiana ...... Appellant versus M/s. A-One Communication ...... 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. None 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. 3. Since the main case has been dismissed, the pending C.M., if any, also stands disposed of. (AJAY TEWARI) JUDGE (HARNARESH SINGH GILL) JUDGE 09.09.2019 anuradha Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No Anuradha 2019.09.13 15:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Basudev Logistics, Jagatsinghpur vs. Principal Commissioner, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Prabhudatta Mishra vs. The Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes And Goods And Services Tax, OdishaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Rajesh Kumar Gupta vs. Joint Commissioner Of GST (Appeal), Territorial Range, BolangirOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Attitude Exim PVT. LTD., Rourkela vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S.Pradeep Kumar Mahapatra, Bhubaneswar vs. Superintendent Bhubaneswar-Iii Circle, CGST Range, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
