COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX GURGAON vs. PRITAM SINGH TH LR GURJIT SINGH

PDF · subscribers
ITA/195/2015HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01109824201505 September 2019Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI,MR. JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the application for condonation of delay. The revenue, through its counsel, stated that the tax effect was below the prescribed monetary limit and sought to withdraw the appeal. The court granted liberty to the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal if circumstances warranted. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty granted. Any pending civil miscellaneous applications were also disposed of as the main case was dismissed. The judgment does not delve into the merits of the original dispute before the ITAT.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) Gurgaon against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). There was a delay of 71 days in re-filing the appeal, which was condoned by the High Court. The revenue sought to withdraw the appeal, citing the monetary limit prescribed in CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018, as amended by Circular No. 17 of 2019 and a subsequent letter. The revenue also requested liberty to revive the appeal if circumstances warranted. The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn with the liberty granted.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the revenue should be dismissed as withdrawn, considering the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limit and the revenue's instruction to withdraw. The revenue argued that the tax effect involved in the appeal was less than the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018, as amended. Therefore, they had instructions to withdraw the appeal. They also requested liberty to revive the appeal if anything survived therein. The judgment does not record any arguments from the respondent-assessee on this specific point, other than their presence through counsel.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

ITA No.195 of 2015 (O&M) 1 332 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CM-12241-CII-2015 in/and ITA No.195 of 2015 (O&M) Date of decision : 05.09.2019 The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) Gurgaon ...... Appellant versus Lt. Sh.Pritam Singh Through LR Sh.Gurjit Singh H.No.748, Phase 3 B1, 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) CM-12241-CII-2015 1. For the reasons recorded, the application is allowed. Delay of 71 days in re-filing the appeal is condoned. ITA No.195 of 2015 2. 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, POOJA SHARMA 2019.09.10 13:15 I am the author of this document

ITA No.195 of 2015 (O&M) 2 he prayed that liberty be granted to the appellant-revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal, in case something survives therein. 3. Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. 4. 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 13:15 I am the author of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →