COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL GURGAON vs. GURJIT SINGH

PDF · subscribers
ITA/189/2015HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01109817201503 October 2024Bench: MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court decided to dismiss the appeal as withdrawn. The reasoning provided is that the appellant-revenue's counsel stated that the tax effect involved was less than the monetary limit prescribed by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) vide Circular No. 3 of 2018, further amended by Circular No. 17 of 2019, read with a subsequent letter dated 20.08.2019. Consequently, the counsel had instructions to withdraw the appeal. The Court granted the liberty prayed for by the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal in case something survives therein. Since the main case was dismissed, any pending C.M. Application also stood disposed of.

What were the facts?

This case involves an appeal filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) Gurgaon (the appellant-revenue) against Sh. Gurjit Singh (the respondent). The appeal pertains to the assessment year(s) not specified in the judgment. The order or action under challenge is the High Court's decision on an appeal. The procedural history is that the revenue, citing the tax effect being below the prescribed monetary limit as per CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018 and Circular No. 17 of 2019, sought to withdraw the present appeal. The revenue also requested liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if circumstances changed.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn, considering the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limit for appeals by the revenue. The appellant-revenue argued that the tax effect involved in the present appeal is less than the monetary limit prescribed in Circular No. 3 of 2018, as amended by Circular No. 17 of 2019, read with Letter No. F.No.279/Misc/M-93/2018-ITJ dated 20.08.2019. Based on these circulars, the revenue's counsel stated they had instructions to withdraw the appeal, while also praying for liberty to revive it if necessary. The respondent's arguments are not recorded in the judgment.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

ITA No.189 of 2015 (O&M) 1 332 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No.189 of 2015 (O&M) Date of decision : 05.09.2019 Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) Gurgaon ...... Appellant versus Sh. Gurjit Singh, #748, Phase-3B1, Mohali ...... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL *** Present : Mr. Vivek Sethi, Senior Standing Counsel and Mr. Varun Issar, Junior Standing Counsel for the appellant. Mr. Akshay Bhan, Senior Advocate with Mr. Alok Mittal, Advocate and Mr. Nitin Jain, Advocate for the respondent. *** AJAY TEWARI, J. (Oral) 1. Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is less than the monetary limit as prescribed in Circular No.3 of 2018 dated 11.07.2018 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, further amended vide Circular No.17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019 read with Letter No.F.No.279/Misc/M-93/2018-ITJ dated 20.08.2019, he has instructions to withdraw the present appeal. However, he prayed that liberty be granted to the appellant-revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal, in case something survives therein. 2. Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. POOJA SHARMA 2019.09.10 17:05 I am the author of this document

ITA No.189 of 2015 (O&M) 2 3. Since the main case has been dismissed, the pending C.M. Application, if any, also stands disposed of.

(AJAY TEWARI) JUDGE (HARNARESH SINGH GILL) JUDGE 05.09.2019 pooja sharma-I Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No POOJA SHARMA 2019.09.10 17:05 I am the author of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →