COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. RANJIT SINGH
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The court granted liberty to the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for. It was 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 case. The court noted that the withdrawal was based on the tax effect and the CBDT circular, not on the merits of the case.
What were the facts?
The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Hisar (appellant-revenue) against Ch. Ranjit Singh (respondent-assessee). The appeal was filed against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The tax effect involved in the appeal was ₹47,40,775/-. The revenue sought to withdraw the appeal based on Circular No. 03/2018 dated 11th July, 2018, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT). The revenue also prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survived therein.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the appeal filed by the revenue should be dismissed as withdrawn in view of the tax effect and the CBDT Circular No. 03/2018? (Question of procedure/administrative policy) Contentions: Assessee: No specific contentions recorded in the judgment. Revenue: The revenue, through its learned counsel, stated that due to the tax effect of ₹47,40,775/-, it had instructions to withdraw the appeal and related applications in accordance with CBDT Circular No. 03/2018. The revenue also sought liberty to revive the appeal if circumstances warranted.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-192-2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: 6.8.2018 Commissioner of Income Tax, Hisar ...Appellant. Versus Ch. Ranjit Singh ...Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN. PRESENT: Mr. Yogesh Putney, Sr. Standing Counsel for the appellant. Mr. Rohit Kaura, Advocate for the respondent. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. Letter dated 25.7.2018/1.8.2018 is taken on record. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is ` 47,40,775/-, he has instructions to withdraw the present appeal as well as the applications 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 August 6, 2018 (AVNEESH JHINGAN) gbs JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No GURBACHAN SINGH 2018.08.08 12:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Abdhish Dhal Samanta, Bhubaneswar vs. Chief Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Kniit Net Industries Private Limited, Khurda vs. Superintendent Of CGST And Central Excise, Bhubaneswar Ii CircleOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Swarnapai Chemicals (Opc) Private Limited, Cuttack vs. Sales Tax Officer, Cuttack IOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S. Middlex, Puri vs. Commnr. Of State Tax, Banijyakar Bhawan, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Sunadei Indane Gramin Vitrak, Nayagarh vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, Cuttack, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
