PR.COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), GURGAON vs. M/S IND SWIFT LABORATORIES LTD

ITA/20/2018HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01119044201818 July 20181 pages

AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the withdrawal of the appeal by the revenue, granting liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if circumstances warranted. The Court clarified that the withdrawal would not be considered an affirmation of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal's order on merits. Furthermore, the legal issue, as claimed by the revenue, was expressly left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate future case. No specific finding on the merits of the original dispute was made.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Gurgaon (the revenue) against M/s Ind Swift Laboratories Ltd., Chandigarh (the assessee). The tax effect involved in the appeal was ₹19,87,653/-. The appeal was filed before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh. The judgment was delivered on July 18, 2018.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be withdrawn by the revenue in view of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018 dated 11th July, 2018, considering the tax effect involved. The revenue argued that due to the tax effect being ₹19,87,653/-, they had instructions to withdraw the appeal in accordance with CBDT Circular No. 03/2018. They also prayed for liberty to revive the appeal if something survived. The judgment does not record any arguments from the assessee.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-20-2018 Date of Decision: 18.7.2018 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Gurgaon ...Appellant. Versus M/s Ind Swift Laboratories Ltd., Chandigarh ...Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN. PRESENT: Mr. Rajesh Sethi, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Arun Biriwal, Advocate and Ms. Pridhi Jaswinder Sandhu, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Surjeet Bhadu, Advocate for the respondent. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is ` 19,87,653/-, he 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, 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. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE July 18, 2018 (AVNEESH JHINGAN) gbs JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Gurbachan Singh 2018.07.20 11:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →