PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -2 CHANDIGARH vs. M/S RKM HOUSING LTD BEHIND CHANDIGARH ENGINEERING COLLEGE SECTOR 112 LANDRAN MOHALI
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, granting the revenue liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for.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 ITAT's order on merits. Furthermore, the legal issue claimed by the revenue was left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. The judgment does not record any specific findings on the merits of the case or the reasoning behind the ITAT's original order.
What were the facts?
The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Chandigarh (appellant-revenue) filed an appeal against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The appeal was filed concerning M/s R.K.M. Housing Ltd., Mohali (respondent-assessee). The tax effect involved in the appeal was ₹ 29,99,700/-. The appeal was filed before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the appeal filed by the revenue should be dismissed as withdrawn in view of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018 dated 11th July, 2018, given the tax effect involved. Contentions: Assessee: Not recorded in the judgment. Revenue: The learned counsel for the appellant-revenue stated that due to the tax effect being ₹ 29,99,700/-, she had instructions to withdraw the appeal in accordance with CBDT Circular No. 03/2018. She also prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survives.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-199-2016 Date of Decision: 20.7.2018 The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Chandigarh ...Appellant. Versus M/s R.K.M. Housing Ltd., Mohali ...Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN. PRESENT: Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Sr. Standing Counsel for the appellant. Mr. Manpreet Singh, Advocate for the respondent. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is ` 29,99,700/-, she 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, she 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 20, 2018 (AVNEESH JHINGAN) gbs JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Gurbachan Singh 2018.07.23 14:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Basudev Logistics, Jagatsinghpur vs. Principal Commissioner, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Prabhudatta Mishra vs. The Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes And Goods And Services Tax, OdishaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Rajesh Kumar Gupta vs. Joint Commissioner Of GST (Appeal), Territorial Range, BolangirOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Attitude Exim PVT. LTD., Rourkela vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S.Pradeep Kumar Mahapatra, Bhubaneswar vs. Superintendent Bhubaneswar-Iii Circle, CGST Range, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
