PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2 LUDHIANA vs. RUPINDER SINGH GILL

PDF · subscribers
ITA/215/2016HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01110408201608 November 2016Bench: MR. JUSTICE M.M. AGGARWAL,MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the appeal to be dismissed as withdrawn, granting the liberty as prayed for by the revenue. 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 future case. The court did not decide the substantive merits of the appeal.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Ludhiana (appellant-revenue) against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The respondent is Rupinder Singh Gill. The tax effect involved in the appeal was ₹19,07,992/-. The appeal was filed in 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 Whether the appeal should be withdrawn by the revenue in view of CBDT Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10.12.2015, considering the tax effect involved. The revenue, through its learned counsel, stated that due to the tax effect of ₹19,07,992/-, it had instructions to withdraw the appeal in accordance with CBDT Circular No. 21/2015. The revenue also sought liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if anything survived therein. No specific arguments were recorded for the respondent.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Sr. No.208 ITA No.215 of 2016 (O&M) Date of decision: 08.11.2016 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Ludhiana ....Appellant versus Rupinder Singh Gill ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.J. VAZIFDAR, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL Present:- Mr. Z.S. Klar, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. B.M. Monga, Advocate and Mr. Rohit Kaura, Advocate, for the respondent. * * * * S.J. VAZIFDAR,

CHIEF JUSTICE (ORAL)

Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is ` 19,07,992/-, he has instructions to withdraw the present appeal in view of the circular No.21/2015 dated 10.12.2015 issued by the C.B.D.T., New Delhi. However, he 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. (S.J. VAZIFDAR) CHIEF JUSTICE (DEEPAK SIBAL) JUDGE November 08, 2016 Jyoti 1 (i) Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No (ii) Whether reportable Yes/No Jyoti Sharma 2016.11.08 17:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →