PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PANCHKULA vs. M/S ADMAC FORMULATIONS, H.NO.272, SECTOR 17, PANCHKULA

PDF · subscribers
ITA/156/2018HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01118995201826 September 2018Bench: MR. JUSTICE R.C. KATHURIA (RETD.),MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, granting the revenue liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for.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 considered an affirmation of the ITAT's order on merits. Furthermore, the legal issue, as claimed by the revenue, was left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate future case. The operative direction was the dismissal of the appeal with liberty to revive.

What were the facts?

The appellant, Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula, filed an appeal against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The respondent is M/s ADMAC Formulations, Panchkula. The appeal pertains to the assessment year(s) not specified in the judgment. The amount in dispute is ₹20,95,621/-. The revenue sought to withdraw the appeal based on CBDT Circular No. 03/2018 dated 11th July, 2018.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn by the revenue. (Question of procedure) The revenue argued that due to the tax effect being below the threshold stipulated in CBDT Circular No. 03/2018, they have instructions to withdraw the appeal. They also prayed for liberty to revive the appeal if circumstances warranted. The judgment does not record any arguments from the respondent.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-156-2018 (O&M) Date of Decision: 26.9.2018 Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula ...Appellant. Versus M/s ADMAC Formulations, Panchkula ...Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN. PRESENT: Mr. Yogesh Putney, Sr. Standing Counsel for the appellant. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is ` 20,95,621/-, he has instructions to withdraw the present appeal in view of Circular No.03/2018, dated 11th July, 2018, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, New Delhi. However, he has 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. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE September 26, 2018 (AVNEESH JHINGAN) gbs JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No GURBACHAN SINGH 2018.09.27 16:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →