THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. TEJINDER SINGH SAHAI

PDF · subscribers

ITA/123/2000HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01036297200003 October 2018Bench: MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT,MR. JUSTICE SUDIP AHLUWALIA1 pages

AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court decided to dismiss the appeal as not pressed. The reasoning was based on the Revenue's submission that the tax effect involved was ₹2,59,075, which is below the threshold of ₹50 lacs stipulated in CBDT Circular No. 3/2018. Consequently, the Revenue did not want to pursue the appeal on its merits. The Court granted liberty to the Revenue to seek revival of the appeal if circumstances changed. The question of law was also expressly kept open. No specific finding was made on the merits of the original dispute.

What were the facts?

The Revenue, Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar, filed an appeal against Tejinder Singh Sahai. The appeal was against an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The tax effect involved in the case was ₹2,59,075. The appeal was filed for the assessment year(s) not specified in the judgment. The Revenue sought to withdraw the appeal based on a Circular issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) concerning the monetary limit for filing appeals.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as not pressed, given the tax effect and the CBDT Circular No. 3/2018? The Revenue argued that the tax effect of ₹2,59,075 is less than ₹50 lacs, and in light of CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018, it does not wish to press the appeal on merits. The judgment does not record any arguments from the Respondent (assessee).

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** ITA No.123 of 2000 (O&M) Date of Decision: 03.10.2018 **** Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar

...Appellant

VS.

Tejinder Singh Sahai

... Respondent **** Coram : Hon’ble Mr.Justice Surya Kant

Hon’ble Mr.Justice Sudip Ahluwalia **** Present: Mr. Vivek Sethi, Advocate for the appellant

Mr. Akshay Bhan, Sr.Advocate with

Mr. Alok Mittal, Advocate for the respondent **** SURYA KANT J. (Oral)

(1) Learned counsel for Revenue states that the tax effect involved in this case is `2,59,075/- and in view of the recent Circular No.3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 issued by the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board Direct Taxes, the tax effect being less than `50 lacs, he does not want to press this appeal on merits. (2) In view of the CBDT Circular, the instant appeal is dismissed as not pressed. As prayed for by learned counsel for the appellant, liberty is granted to the Revenue to seek revival of the appeal, if need be, in the changed circumstances. The question of law is also kept open.

(Surya Kant) Judge

03.10.2018 vishal shonkar (Sudip Ahluwalia) Judge

Whether speaking/reasoned?

Yes/No 2. Whether reportable?

Yes/No V VISHAL 2018.10.06 12:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →