COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S PUNJAB TRACTORS LTD

ITA/18/2015HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01109807201519 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The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn with liberty granted to the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for. The Court 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 claimed by the revenue was explicitly left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. No decision on the merits of the case was made.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala (the revenue) against M/s Punjab Tractor Ltd., Mohali (the assessee). The assessment year(s) are not specified. The order or action under challenge is the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The amount in dispute, referred to as the tax effect, is ₹21,53,000. The procedural history involves the revenue filing the present appeal before the High Court.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn in view of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018, dated 11th July, 2018, given the tax effect involved? (Question of procedure/administrative policy) Contentions: Assessee: Not recorded. Revenue: The learned counsel for the appellant-revenue stated that due to the tax effect of ₹21,53,000, they have instructions to withdraw the appeal in accordance with CBDT Circular No. 03/2018. They prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survives.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-18-2015 Date of Decision: 19.7.2018 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala ...Appellant. Versus M/s Punjab Tractor Ltd., Mohali ...Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN. PRESENT: Mr. Z.S. Klar, Sr. Standing Counsel for the appellant. Mr. Mandeep Singh Kanda, Advocate for the respondent. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is ` 21,53,000/-, 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 July 19, 2018 (AVNEESH JHINGAN) gbs JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Gurbachan Singh 2018.07.20 11:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →