PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PANCHKULA vs. M/S GYMKHANA CLUB , SECTOR 3 , PANCHKULA

PDF · subscribers
ITA/174/2018HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01119015201805 October 2018Bench: MR. JUSTICE R.C. KATHURIA (RETD.),MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The court granted the revenue the liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for. It was 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, as claimed by the revenue, was left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. The court did not decide the merits of the case.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula (appellant-revenue) against M/s Gymkhana Club, Panchkula (respondent-assessee). The tax effect involved in the appeal was ₹11,72,822. The appeal was filed before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh. The procedural history leading to this appeal before the High Court is not detailed in the provided text, other than it being an appeal against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT).

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the revenue should be withdrawn in view of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018, dated 11th July, 2018, concerning monetary limits for filing appeals. The revenue argued that due to the tax effect being below the prescribed limit in the circular, they have instructions to withdraw the appeal. The revenue also 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 assessee's side.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-174-2018 (O&M) Date of Decision: 5.10.2018 Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula ...Appellant. Versus M/s Gymkhana Club, Panchkula ...Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN. PRESENT: Mr. Yogesh Putney, 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 ` 11,72,822/-, 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 October 5, 2018 (AVNEESH JHINGAN) gbs JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No GURBACHAN SINGH 2018.10.09 11:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →