THE COMMISSIONER OF W.T.PTL vs. M/S SOUTHERN BOTTLERS,NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA/190/2001HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01042026200123 August 2016Bench: MR. JUSTICE M.M. AGGARWAL,MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The revenue was granted liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal. 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, as claimed by the revenue, was left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate future case. No specific finding was made on the merits of the case.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala (appellant-revenue) against M/s Southern Bottlers (P) Ltd., New Delhi (respondent-assessee). The appeal was against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The tax effect involved in the appeal was Rs. 4,65,150/-. The appeal was decided on August 23, 2016.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn in view of CBDT Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10.12.2015, considering the tax effect involved. The revenue argued that due to the tax effect being below the threshold stipulated in CBDT Circular No. 21/2015, they had instructions to withdraw the appeal. They also prayed for liberty to revive the appeal if circumstances warranted. The assessee's arguments are not recorded in the judgment.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Sr. No. 425 ITA-190-2001

Decided on : 23.08.2016 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala ..... Appellant

VERSUS M/s Southern Bottlers (P) Ltd., New Delhi ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.J. VAZIFDAR, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL Present: Mr.Zora Singh Klar, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr.Akshay Bhan, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Alok Mittal, Advocate, for the respondent.

******* S.J. VAZIFDAR, C.J. (Oral) Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is Rs.4,65,150/-, he has instructions to withdraw the present appeal in view of the circular No.21/2015, dated 10.12.2015, issued by the C.B.D.T., New Delhi. However, he 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 Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for.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.

[ S.J. VAZIFDAR ]

CHIEF JUSTICE 23.08.2016

[ DEEPAK SIBAL ] shamsher JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No Shamsher Singh 2016.08.24 17:36 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →