PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX II AMRITSAR vs. M/S SATISH AGGARWAL & COMPANY

PDF · subscribers
ITA/220/2016HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01110414201601 October 2018Bench: MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA,LOK ADALAT BENCH - 31 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The court granted liberty to the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for. It was 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 court did not decide the merits of the case.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Amritsar (the revenue) against M/s Satish Aggarwal & Company (the assessee). The assessment year(s) are not specified. The appeal challenges an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The amount in dispute is ₹32,00,000. The procedural history is that the revenue, through its learned counsel, sought to withdraw the present appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn by the revenue? (Question of procedure) The revenue argued that due to the tax effect of ₹32,00,000, it had instructions to withdraw the appeal in accordance with CBDT Circular No. 03/2018 dated 11th July, 2018. The revenue prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survives therein. The assessee's arguments are not recorded in the judgment.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No. 220 of 2016 Decided on : 01.10.2018 The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Amritsar . . . Appellant(s) Versus M/s Satish Aggarwal & Company . . . Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN PRESENT: Mr. Denesh Goyal, Sr. Standing Counsel for the appellant(s). Mr. Sachin Bhardwaj, Advocate and Mr. Divya Suri, Advocate for the respondent(s). **** AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (Oral) Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is ` 32,00,000/-, he has instructions to withdraw the present appeal in view of the circular No.03/2018, dated 11th July, 2018, 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. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE October 01, 2018 J.Ram (AVNEESH JHINGAN) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No JAWALA RAM 2018.10.04 15:02 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →