THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-II, AMRITSAR vs. M/S MANOHAR CYCLE WORKS

PDF · subscribers
ITA/166/2017HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01117354201702 August 2018Bench: MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA,LOK ADALAT BENCH - 31 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, granting the revenue the liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for.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 claimed by the revenue was left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. The operative direction was the dismissal of the appeal as withdrawn with liberty granted.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Chandigarh (the revenue) against M/s Manohar Cycle Works, Amritsar (the assessee). The appeal challenged an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The tax effect involved in the appeal was ₹ 20,90,420/-. 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, New Delhi. The revenue requested liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if anything survived.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn by the revenue. The revenue argued that it had instructions to withdraw the appeal due to the tax effect being below the monetary limit prescribed by Circular No. 03/2018. The revenue also requested liberty to revive the appeal. The judgment does not record any arguments from the assessee.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-166-2017 Date of Decision: 2.8.2018 The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Chandigarh ...Appellant. Versus M/s Manohar Cycle Works, Amritsar ...Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN. PRESENT: Mr. Denesh Goyal, 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 ` 20,90,420/-, 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 August 2, 2018 (AVNEESH JHINGAN) gbs JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Gurbachan Singh 2018.08.03 14:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →