COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (TDS), CHANDIGARH vs. REGISTRAR, PUNJAB UNIVERSITY, CHANDIGARH
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The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn with liberty granted to the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for.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 Tribunal's order on merits. Furthermore, the legal issue claimed by the revenue was explicitly 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 Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), Chandigarh (the revenue) against the Registrar, Panjab University, Chandigarh (the assessee). The assessment year(s) are not specified. The order or action under challenge is not explicitly stated, but it is an appeal against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The amount in dispute is stated to be ₹27,19,631/-. The procedural history is that the revenue sought to withdraw the appeal based on CBDT Circular No. 03/2018.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn by the revenue. (Question of procedure) Assessee's Arguments: No arguments are recorded for the assessee as the appeal was withdrawn by the revenue. Revenue's Arguments: The revenue, through its learned counsel, stated that due to the tax effect of ₹27,19,631/-, it had 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. The revenue also prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survived therein.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-188-2012 Date of Decision: 30.7.2018 Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), Chandigarh ...Appellant. Versus Registrar, Panjab University, Chandigarh ...Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN. PRESENT: Mr. Denesh Goyal, Sr. Standing Counsel for the appellant. Ms. Radhika Suri, Senior Advocate with Mr. Manpreet 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 ` 27,19,631/-, 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 30, 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 →- Sunanda Raul vs. The Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes And Goods Nad Services Tax, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Zakir Hussain Ali Khan vs. Additional Commissioner (Appeals), BhubaneswarOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Manorama Nayak, Khorda vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Bhubaneswar Iv Circle, KhurdaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Chandan Kumar Bathual vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, Cuttack-Iii Range, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Manoranjan Sadangi vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, Gopalpur Range, GanjamOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
