COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX PATIALA vs. M/S INDUSTRIAL CABLES (INDIA) LTD., RAJPURA

PDF · subscribers
ITA/2/2012HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01099271201211 February 2019Bench: MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA MURARI,MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn with liberty granted to the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal.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 Tribunal's order on merits. Furthermore, the legal issue claimed by the revenue was left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. The operative direction was the dismissal of the appeal as withdrawn with liberty.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala (appellant-revenue) against M/s Industrial Cables (India) Ltd., Rajpura (respondent-assessee). The tax effect involved in the appeal was ₹21,02,352/-. The appeal was presented before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be withdrawn by the revenue in view of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018 dated 11.07.2018, considering the tax effect involved. The revenue, through its learned counsel, stated that due to the tax effect of ₹21,02,352/-, it had instructions to withdraw the present appeal in accordance with CBDT Circular No. 03/2018. The revenue also prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survives therein. No specific arguments were recorded for the assessee.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

ITA-2-2012 (O&M) Date of decision:- 11.02.2019

The Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala ...Appellant Versus

M/s Industrial Cables (India) Ltd., Rajpura ...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA MURARI, CHIEF JUSTICE

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI

Present:- Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Advocate,

for the appellant.

Mr. Pankaj Jain, Senior Advocate,

with Mr. Divya Suri, Advocate,

for the respondent. * * * * KRISHNA MURARI, C.J. (ORAL)

Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is ` 21,02,352/-, he has instructions to withdraw the present appeal in view of Circular No. 03/2018, dated 11.07.2018 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. 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.

(KRISHNA MURARI)

CHIEF JUSTICE

(ARUN PALLI) JUDGE 11.02.2019 Amodh Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No

AMODH SHARMA 2019.02.13 12:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →