THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX PKL vs. SH SANJAY ANAND

PDF · subscribers

ITA/164/2003HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01004389200313 September 2018Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL,DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR1 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that in view of CBDT Circular No. 3/2018, the instant appeal is dismissed as not pressed. The reasoning is based on the Revenue's submission that the tax effect involved, ₹20,48,032/-, is less than ₹50 lacs, making it fall within the scope of the circular which advises against pursuing appeals with a lower tax effect. The ratio decidendi is that appeals with a tax effect below the prescribed monetary limit in the relevant CBDT circular can be withdrawn or not pressed by the Revenue. Liberty was granted to the Revenue to seek revival of the appeal if circumstances changed, and the question of law was kept open.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Panchkula (Revenue) against Sanjay Anand (Assessee). The assessment year(s) are not explicitly stated in the provided text. The appeal challenges an order or action by an unspecified authority. The tax effect involved in the case is ₹20,48,032/-. The procedural history indicates that the Revenue, through its counsel, stated that they did not wish to press the appeal on merits due to the tax effect being less than ₹50 lacs, as per Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as not pressed in light of the tax effect and CBDT Circular No. 3/2018? (Question of law). The Revenue argued that the tax effect of ₹20,48,032/- is below the threshold of ₹50 lacs stipulated in Circular No. 3/2018, and therefore, they do not wish to press the appeal on merits. The Assessee's arguments are not recorded in the provided text. The judgment does not explicitly frame a question of law regarding the merits of the case, but rather the procedural aspect of pressing the appeal.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** ITA No.164 of 2003 (O&M) Date of Decision: 13.09.2018 **** Commissioner of Income-tax, Panchkula

...Appellant

VS.

Sanjay Anand

... Respondent **** Coram : Hon’ble Mr.Justice Surya Kant

Hon’ble Mr.Justice Sudip Ahluwalia **** Present: Mr. Yogesh Putney, Advocate for the appellant

Mr. Alok Mittal, Advocate for the respondent **** SURYA KANT J. (Oral)

(1) Learned counsel for Revenue states that the tax effect involved in this case is `20,48,032/- and in view of the recent Circular No.3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 issued by the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board Direct Taxes, a photocopy whereof is taken on record and is marked as Mark ‘A’, the tax effect being less than `50 lacs, he does not want to press this appeal on merits. (2) In view of the CBDT Circular, the instant appeal is dismissed as not pressed. As prayed for by learned counsel for the appellant, liberty is granted to the Revenue to seek revival of the appeal, if need be, in the changed circumstances. The question of law is also kept open.

(Surya Kant) Judge

13.09.2018 vishal shonkar (Sudip Ahluwalia) Judge

Whether speaking/reasoned?

Yes 2. Whether reportable?

No V.Vishal 2018.09.17 16:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →