COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I JALANDHAR vs. M/S MAX INDIA LIMITED

PDF · subscribers
ITA/184/2013HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01105036201310 September 2018Bench: MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA,LOK ADALAT BENCH - 31 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the revenue. The dismissal was based on the low tax effect of ₹1,00,640/-, following the precedent set by the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Dhanalekshmi Bank Ltd. (2015) 373 ITR 526 (SC). In that case, the Supreme Court had dismissed the appeal without going into the merits due to low tax effect, leaving the question of law open. The High Court clarified that the dismissal of the present appeal should not be construed as an affirmation of the ITAT's order on merits. The legal issue raised by the revenue was expressly left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate future case.

What were the facts?

The Revenue, Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Jalandhar, filed an appeal against an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The assessee is M/s Max India Limited. The appeal pertains to an assessment year not specified in the judgment. The tax effect involved in the appeal is ₹1,00,640/-. The Revenue initially filed the appeal based on a composite order and the applicability of circular No. 03/2018 dated 11.07.2018. However, the High Court did not delve into the merits of the appeal or the applicability of the circular.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the revenue is maintainable in view of the tax effect involved and the Supreme Court's decision in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Dhanalekshmi Bank Ltd. (2015)? Assessee's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the assessee. The High Court proceeded based on the tax effect. Revenue's Contention: The revenue argued that the appeal was maintainable as it was filed against a composite order and in view of circular No. 03/2018 dated 11.07.2018. However, the court did not enter into this controversy.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

207 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-184-2013 (O&M) Date of decision : 10.09.2018 Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Jalandhar ........ Petitioner vs M/s Max India Limited ...... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN Present:- Mr.Vivek Sethi, Advocate for the appellant-revenue. Mr. Vishal Gupta, Advocate for the respondent-assessee. *** AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (Oral) Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue submitted that the appeal had been filed as the composite order was passed and would be maintainable in view of circular No.03/2018, dated 11.07.2018. However, we are not entering into the controversy regarding the applicability of the circular, since the tax effect involved is `1,00,640/-. In view of the order of the Apex Court in 'Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Dhanalekshmi Bank Ltd., [2015] 373 ITR 526 (SC)'

, where the Supreme Court had dismissed the appeal without going into the merits of the appeal due to low tax effect leaving the question of law open, the present appeal is dismissed. It is, however, clarified that dismissal of the appeal 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

(AVNEESH JHINGAN) 10.09.2018 JUDGE anju Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No Whether reportable? Yes/No ANJU 2018.09.12 11:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document phhc

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →