PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 CHD vs. M/S VENUS REMEDIES LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA/178/2015HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01109805201526 July 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The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. 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 construed as an affirmation of the Tribunal's order on merits. Furthermore, the legal issue claimed by the revenue was left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. No finding was reached on the merits of the case.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Chandigarh (the revenue) against M/s Venus Remedies Ltd. (the assessee). The assessment year(s) are not specified in the judgment. The order or action under challenge is the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The tax effect involved in the appeal is ₹38,71,543/-. The appeal was filed before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the revenue should be dismissed as withdrawn in view of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018, dated 11th July, 2018, considering the tax effect involved. The revenue argued that due to the tax effect being below the threshold stipulated in CBDT Circular No. 03/2018, it had 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 specific arguments from the assessee's side regarding the issues to be decided on merits.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-178-2015 Date of Decision: 26.7.2018 Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Chandigarh ...Appellant. Versus M/s Venus Remedies Ltd., Manimajra ...Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN. PRESENT: Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Sr. Standing Counsel for the appellant. Ms. Harmanjeet Kaur, Advocate for the respondent. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is ` 38,71,543/-, she 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, she 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 July 26, 2018 (AVNEESH JHINGAN) gbs JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Gurbachan Singh 2018.08.01 12:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →