COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) LUDHIANA vs. M/S JINDAL FINE INDUSTRIES
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, granting the liberty prayed for by the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal. The Court clarified that the withdrawal of the appeal by the revenue would not be considered an affirmation of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal's order on merits. Furthermore, the Court explicitly stated that the legal issue claimed by the revenue was being left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. No decision was made on the merits of the appeal.
What were the facts?
The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ludhiana (the revenue) against M/s Jindal Fine Industries, Ludhiana (the assessee). The appeal was filed before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh. The tax effect involved in the appeal was ₹14,78,670/-. The revenue sought to withdraw the appeal based on Circular No. 03/2018 dated 11th July, 2018, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. The revenue also prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survived.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn by the revenue. Assessee's Contentions: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the assessee. Revenue's Contentions: The revenue, through its learned counsel, stated that due to the tax effect of ₹14,78,670/-, it had instructions to withdraw the appeal in accordance with Circular No. 03/2018 dated 11th July, 2018, issued by the CBDT. The revenue also prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if any aspect of the matter survived.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-160-2013 Date of Decision: 18.7.2018 Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ludhiana ...Appellant. Versus M/s Jindal Fine Industries, Ludhiana ...Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN. PRESENT: Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Sr. Standing Counsel for the appellant. Mr. Rajiv Sharma, Advocate for the respondent. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is ` 14,78,670/-, 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 July 18, 2018 (AVNEESH JHINGAN) gbs JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Gurbachan Singh 2018.07.20 11:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Mishka Steels LLP And Anr. vs. The Superintendent Of Central Goods And Service Tax, Cx, Range-Ii, Behala Div. And Ors.Calcutta · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Gujarat Co-Operative Milk Marketing Federation Limited vs. Union Of INDIAGujarat · 14 Oct 2026
- Ramesh K Devadiga vs. Khernagar Nandadeep Co Operative Housing Society LTDBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- Ramesh K Devadiga And Ors vs. Khernagar Nandadeep Co-Operative Housing Society LTD And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- Permender Singh vs. Union Of INDIA And Ors.Calcutta · 14 Oct 2026
