PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX PANCHKULA vs. DHANENDER KUMAR (HUF)

PDF · subscribers
ITA/168/2019HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01015939201921 April 2022Bench: MR. JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA,MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The court granted liberty to the appellant-revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal, as prayed for. It was clarified that the withdrawal of the appeal by the appellant-revenue would not be considered an affirmation of the Tribunal's order on merits. Furthermore, the legal issue, as claimed by the appellant-revenue, was left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. Any pending C.M. Application, if any, was also disposed of as the main case was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula (appellant-revenue) against Dhanender Kumar (HUF) (respondent-assessee). The assessment year(s) are not specified in the judgment. The order under challenge is an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The procedural history involves the appellant-revenue seeking to withdraw the present appeal. The reason for withdrawal is stated to be that the tax effect involved is less than the monetary limit prescribed in CBDT Circular No.3 of 2018, as amended by Circular No.17 of 2019 and Letter No.F.No.279/Misc/M-93/2018-ITJ dated 20.08.2019.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn by the appellant-revenue, considering the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limit as per CBDT Circulars? The appellant-revenue, through its learned counsel, stated that due to the tax effect being below the monetary limit prescribed in CBDT Circular No.3 of 2018, as amended, they have instructions to withdraw the present appeal. They prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survives therein. The judgment does not record any arguments from the respondent-assessee.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-168-2019 (O&M) Date of decision: 21.04.2022 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula .... Appellant Versus Dhanender Kumar (HUF) .... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN Present: Mr. Yogesh Putney, Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant. ****

TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA, J (ORAL) 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. It is, however, clarified that withdrawal of the appeal by the appellant-revenue shall not be taken to be affirmation of order of the Tribunal on merits. Further, the legal issue as claimed by the appellant-revenue is being left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. DINESH KUMAR 2022.04.25 11:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

ITA-168-2019 (O&M) -2- 3. Since the main case has been dismissed, the pending C.M. Application, if any, also stands disposed of. (TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA) JUDGE (PANKAJ JAIN)

JUDGE 21.04.2022 Dinesh

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes

Whether Reportable : No DINESH KUMAR 2022.04.25 11:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →