THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX PANCHKULA vs. RAJWINDER KAUR MAHAL

PDF · subscribers
ITA/125/2016HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01110308201603 September 2019Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI,MR. JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, granting the appellant-revenue liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for.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 construed as an affirmation of the ITAT's order on merits. Furthermore, the legal issue that formed the basis of the appeal was expressly left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate future case. Any pending miscellaneous applications were also disposed of as a consequence of the main appeal being dismissed.

What were the facts?

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula (appellant-revenue) filed an appeal before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The respondent is Mrs. Rajwinder Kaur Mahal. The appeal was filed for the assessment year(s) not specified in the judgment. The appellant-revenue sought to withdraw the appeal due to the tax effect being below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018, as amended by Circular No. 17 of 2019 and Letter No. F.No. 279/Misc/M-93/2018-ITJ dated 20.08.2019. The appellant requested liberty to revive the appeal if circumstances changed.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the appellant-revenue should be dismissed as withdrawn, considering the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limits, and if liberty should be granted to revive the appeal. (Mixed question of law and fact, concerning the applicability of CBDT Circulars). Contentions: Assessee: Not recorded in the judgment. Revenue: Argued that due to the low tax effect, the appeal should be withdrawn as per CBDT Circulars No. 3 of 2018 and 17 of 2019, and sought liberty to revive the appeal. The revenue also stated that the withdrawal should not be considered an affirmation of the ITAT's order on merits, and the legal issue should remain open for future adjudication.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

ITA No.125 of 2016 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No.125 of 2016 (O&M) Date of decision : 03.09.2019 The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula ...... Appellant versus Mrs. Rajwinder Kaur Mahal ...... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL *** Present : Mr. Yogesh Putney, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Manpreet S.Kanda, Advocate 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. It is, however,clarified that withdrawal of the appeal by the appellant-revenue shall not be taken to be affirmation of order of the Tribunal on merits. POOJA SHARMA 2019.09.04 16:11 I am the author of this document

ITA No.125 of 2016 (O&M) 2 Further, the legal issue as claimed by the appellant-revenue is being left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. 3. 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 03.09.2019 pooja sharma-I Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No POOJA SHARMA 2019.09.04 16:11 I am the author of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →