COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR vs. M/S SAKAY TRADERS, BASTI NAU, JALANDHAR

PDF · subscribers

ITA/18/2000HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01036327200003 October 2018Bench: MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT,MR. JUSTICE SUDIP AHLUWALIA1 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court decided not to press the appeal on merits. Citing CBDT Circular No. 3/2018, the Revenue stated that the tax effect of ₹42,51,810/- was below the threshold of ₹50 lacs, and therefore, they did not wish to pursue the appeal. The High Court, in view of this submission and the circular, dismissed the appeal as not pressed. Liberty was granted to the Revenue to seek revival of the appeal if circumstances changed. The question of law was also kept open.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar (Revenue) against M/s Sakay Traders (Assessee). The assessment year(s) are not explicitly stated. The appeal challenges an order or action that is not detailed in the provided text. The tax effect involved in the case is stated to be ₹42,51,810/-. The procedural history is limited to the filing of this appeal before the High Court.

What were the issues?

The primary issue before the High Court was whether to proceed with the appeal on its merits. The Revenue, through its counsel, stated that the tax effect involved is ₹42,51,810/-. The Revenue's contention was that in view of Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 issued by the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT), which sets a monetary limit for filing appeals, and given that the tax effect is less than ₹50 lacs, the Revenue did not wish to press the appeal on merits. The Assessee's arguments are not recorded in the judgment.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** ITA No.18 of 2000 (O&M) Date of Decision: 03.10.2018 **** Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar

...Appellant

VS.

M/s Sakay Traders

... Respondent **** Coram : Hon’ble Mr.Justice Surya Kant

Hon’ble Mr.Justice Sudip Ahluwalia **** Present: Mr. Vivek Sethi, Advocate for the appellant

Mr. Akshay Bhan, Sr.Advocate with

Mr. Alok Mittal, Advocate for the respondent **** SURYA KANT J. (Oral)

(1) Learned counsel for Revenue states that the tax effect involved in this case is `42,51,810/- and in view of the recent Circular No.3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 issued by the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board Direct Taxes, the tax effect being less than `50 lacs, he does not want to press this appeal on merits. (2) In view of the CBDT Circular, the instant appeal is dismissed as not pressed. As prayed for by learned counsel for the appellant, liberty is granted to the Revenue to seek revival of the appeal, if need be, in the changed circumstances. The question of law is also kept open.

(Surya Kant) Judge

03.10.2018 vishal shonkar (Sudip Ahluwalia) Judge

Whether speaking/reasoned?

Yes/No 2. Whether reportable?

Yes/No V VISHAL 2018.10.06 13:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →