PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX FARIDABAD vs. DEVESH KUMAR
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, granting the revenue liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for. The Court clarified that the withdrawal would not be considered an affirmation of the ITAT's order on merits. Furthermore, the legal issue claimed by the revenue was left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. The decision was based on the revenue's instructions to withdraw due to the tax effect being below the threshold stipulated in the CBDT circular.
What were the facts?
The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad (appellant-revenue) against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The respondent was Shri Devesh Kumar. An affidavit filed by the respondent indicated that the tax effect in the case was ₹33,32,900, which was not controverted by the revenue. The appeal was filed for the assessment year(s) not specified in the judgment.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the appeal should be withdrawn by the revenue in view of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018 dated 11th July, 2018, considering the tax effect of ₹33,32,900. The appellant-revenue, through its counsel, stated that it had instructions to withdraw the appeal in view of the aforementioned CBDT circular, given the tax effect. The revenue also prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survives therein. The respondent did not contest the withdrawal based on the tax effect.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-184-2015 Date of Decision: 5.9.2018 Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad ...Appellant. Versus Shri Devesh Kumar ...Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN. PRESENT: Mr. Arun Sharma, Advocate for Mr. Tajender K. Joshi, Sr. Standing Counsel for the appellant. Mr. Amit Parsad, Advocate for the respondent. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. Affidavit dated 4.9.2018 of respondent filed in Court today is taken on record. As per the affidavit, tax effect in this case is ` 33,32,900/- which is not controverted by the learned counsel for the revenue. 2. In view thereof, learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that 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. 3. 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 September 5, 2018 (AVNEESH JHINGAN) gbs JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No GURBACHAN SINGH 2018.09.07 11:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Yadeshwar Mallekedi vs. The State Of TelanganaTelangana · 15 Oct 2026
- Manoj Kumar Das vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Superwealth Financial Enterprises Private Limited, Khordha vs. Joint Commissioner Good And Service Tax Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Simanchal Sahoo vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Prafulla Chandra Khatua, Mayurbhanj vs. The State Tax Officer Of CT And GST, MayurbhanjOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
