C I T vs. M/S PURE DRINKS LTD.

PDF · subscribers
ITA/144/2007HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01072818200723 August 2016Bench: MR. JUSTICE GURDEV SINGH,MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA1 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The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, granting the revenue the liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for.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, as claimed by the revenue, was expressly left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate future case. No specific finding was made on the merits of the case.

What were the facts?

The Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala (the appellant-revenue) filed an appeal against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The appeal was filed for the assessment year(s) not specified in the judgment. The amount in dispute, or tax effect, was Rs. 1,75,000/-. The present proceedings are before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the revenue should be withdrawn in view of CBDT Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10.12.2015, considering the tax effect of Rs. 1,75,000/-? The revenue, through its learned counsel, stated that due to the tax effect being below the threshold stipulated in CBDT Circular No. 21/2015, it had instructions to withdraw the appeal. The revenue also prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survives therein. The respondent (assessee) did not record any arguments.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Sr. No. 572 (2) ITA-144-2007

Decided on : 23.08.2016 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala ..... Appellant

VERSUS M/s Pure Drinks (New Delhi) Ltd., New Delhi ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.J. VAZIFDAR, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL Present: Mr.Zora Singh Klar, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr.Akshay Bhan, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Alok Mittal, Advocate, for the respondent.

******* S.J. VAZIFDAR, C.J. (Oral) Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is Rs.1,75,000/-, he has instructions to withdraw the present appeal in view of the circular No.21/2015, dated 10.12.2015, issued by the C.B.D.T., New Delhi. However, he 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.

[ S.J. VAZIFDAR ]

CHIEF JUSTICE 23.08.2016

[ DEEPAK SIBAL ] shamsher JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No Shamsher Singh 2016.08.24 17:36 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →