PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S GLAXOSMITHKLINE ASIA PRIVATE LIMITED

PDF · subscribers
ITA/158/2019HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01025315201925 February 2025Bench: MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI,MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court, upon hearing the learned counsel for both parties, noted their agreement that the tax effect in the appeal was less than Rs. 2 Crore and the matter did not fall under any exceptions. In accordance with Circular No. 09/2024 dated 17.09.2024 and Circular No. 5/2024 dated 15.03.2024, the Court ordered that the appeal as well as the cross-objections be disposed of as not pressed. No decision was made on the merits of the appeal or the cross-objections. The operative direction was to dispose of the matter as not pressed.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Chandigarh (Revenue) against M/s GlaxoSmithKline Asia Private Limited (Assessee). The assessment year(s) are not specified in the provided text. The appeal and cross-objections were listed for decision. The parties, through their learned counsel, agreed that the tax effect in the appeal was less than Rs. 2 Crore and did not fall under any exceptions to the relevant circulars. Consequently, they jointly requested that the appeal and cross-objections be disposed of as not pressed.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal and cross-objections should be disposed of as not pressed, considering the tax effect and the applicability of Circular No. 09/2024 dated 17.09.2024 and Circular No. 5/2024 dated 15.03.2024? (Question of law) Assessee's Contention: The assessee's counsel, along with the revenue's counsel, agreed that the tax effect was below Rs. 2 Crore and the matter did not fall under any exceptions. Therefore, they jointly submitted that the appeal and cross-objections should be disposed of as not pressed in light of the aforementioned circulars. Revenue's Contention: The revenue's counsel, along with the assessee's counsel, agreed that the tax effect was below Rs. 2 Crore and the matter did not fall under any exceptions. Therefore, they jointly submitted that the appeal and cross-objections should be disposed of as not pressed in light of the aforementioned circulars.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-158-2019(O&M) and XOBJ-5-2020 Date of decision: 25.02.2025 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Chandigarh … Appellant Versus M/s GlaxoSmithKline Asia Private Limited … Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA Present: Mr. Vaibhav Gupta, Senior Standing Counsel, for the appellant-Revenue. Mr. Ajay Vohra, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Neeraj Jain, Advocate, and Mr. Aniket D. Agrawal, Advocate, for the Cross-objector/respondent. *** ARUN PALLI, J. (Oral) Learned counsel for parties are ad idem that the tax effect in the present appeal is less than Rs.2 Crore and the matter is not covered under any exceptions either. Therefore, in the wake of Circular No.09/2024 dated 17.09.2024, read with Circular No.5/2024 dated 15.03.2024, the appeal as also the cross-objections be disposed of as not pressed. Ordered accordingly. ( Arun Palli )

Judge 25.02.2025 Rajan ( Sudeepti Sharma ) Judge Whether speaking / reasoned: YES/NO Whether Reportable: YES/NO RAJAN KUMAR 2025.02.27 10:29 I am approving this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →