PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PANCHKULA vs. PARVEEN KUMAR
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court decided to dismiss the appeal as withdrawn. The reasoning was based on the submission by the revenue's counsel that the tax effect was below the prescribed monetary limits for filing appeals, as per the relevant CBDT circulars. The court granted the liberty as prayed for by the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal in case something survives therein. The pending Civil Miscellaneous Application, if any, was also disposed of as the main case was dismissed. No issue was expressly left undecided.
What were the facts?
The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula (the revenue) against an order concerning Sh. Parveen Kumar (the assessee). The assessment year(s) are not specified. The specific order or action under challenge is not detailed. The amount in dispute is not stated. The procedural history is that the revenue's counsel informed the High Court that due to the tax effect being below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018 and Circular No. 17 of 2019, they had instructions to withdraw the appeal. The revenue requested liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if circumstances changed.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn by the revenue. (Question of procedure) The assessee's contentions are not recorded in the judgment. The revenue's contention is that the tax effect involved is less than the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018, as amended by Circular No. 17 of 2019, read with Letter No. F.No.279/Misc/M-93/2018-ITJ dated 20.08.2019. Based on this, the revenue sought to withdraw the appeal, requesting liberty to revive it if necessary.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No.167 of 2017 (O&M) Date of decision : 10.09.2019 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula ...... Appellant versus Sh. Parveen Kumar ...... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL Present : Mr. Yogesh Putney, Advocate for the appellant. Ms. Salima Chalana, Advocate for the respondent.
*** AJAY TEWARI, J. (Oral) 1. Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is less than the monetary limit as prescribed in Circular No.3 of 2018 dated 11.07.2018 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, further amended vide Circular No.17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019 read with Letter No.F.No.279/Misc/M-93/2018-ITJ dated 20.08.2019, he has instructions to withdraw the present appeal. However, he prayed that liberty be granted to the appellant-revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal, in case something survives therein. 2. Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. 3. Since the main case has been dismissed, the pending C.M. Application, if any, also stands disposed of. (AJAY TEWARI) JUDGE (HARNARESH SINGH GILL) JUDGE 10.09.2019 pooja sharma-I Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No POOJA SHARMA 2019.09.12 17:42 I am the author 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
