PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PANCHKULA vs. M/S HARYANA TOURISM CORPORATION LTD.,SCO 17-19 SECTOR 17-B,CHANDIGARH

PDF · subscribers
ITA/16/2018HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01118999201830 July 2018Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL,MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The court granted liberty to the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for. It was 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 claimed by the revenue was left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. The judgment does not record any decision on the merits of the case.

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 was M/s Haryana Tourism Corporation Ltd. The appeal was filed for Assessment Year(s) not specified in the judgment. The tax effect involved in the appeal was ₹5,56,382/-. The revenue sought to withdraw the appeal based on CBDT Circular No. 03/2018 dated July 11, 2018.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn by the revenue. (Question of procedure) Assessee's Arguments: Not recorded in the judgment. Revenue's Arguments: The revenue, through its learned counsel, stated that due to the tax effect of ₹5,56,382/-, it had instructions to withdraw the present appeal in view of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018, dated July 11, 2018. The revenue prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survives therein.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No. 16 of 2018 (O&M) Decided on : 30.07.2018 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula . . . Appellant(s) Versus M/s Haryana Tourism Corporation Ltd. . . . Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN PRESENT: Mr. Yogesh Putney, Sr. Standing Counsel for the appellant(s). Mr. Deepak Manchanda, Advocate for the respondent(s). **** AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (Oral) Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is ` 5,56,382/-, he has instructions to withdraw the present appeal in view of the circular No.03/2018, dated 11th July, 2018, 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. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE July 30, 2018 J.Ram (AVNEESH JHINGAN) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No Jawala Ram 2018.08.04 13:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →