COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II, LUDHIANA vs. SHIV PARSHAD AGGARWAL

PDF · subscribers
ITA/234/2011HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01095559201127 October 2016Bench: MR. JUSTICE S.J. VAZIFDAR,MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL1 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The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn with liberty granted to the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for.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, as claimed by the revenue, was left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate future case. No specific finding was given on the merits of the ITAT's order.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Ludhiana (the revenue) against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The respondent is Sh. Shiv Parshad Aggarwal. The appeal was decided on October 27, 2016. The revenue sought to withdraw the appeal due to the tax effect involved, which was approximately Rs. 10.39 lacs, in accordance with CBDT Circular No. 21/2015 dated December 10, 2015. The revenue also requested liberty to revive the appeal if circumstances warranted.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the revenue is permitted to withdraw the appeal, with liberty to revive it, based on the tax effect and CBDT Circular No. 21/2015. (Question of procedure/administrative policy) The revenue argued that due to the tax effect being below the threshold stipulated in CBDT Circular No. 21/2015, it had instructions to withdraw the appeal. It further prayed for liberty to revive the appeal. The judgment does not record any arguments from the respondent.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Sr. No. 330 (14)

ITA-234-2011 (O&M)

Decided on : 27.10.2016 Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Ludhiana

..... Appellant

VERSUS Sh. Shiv Parshad Aggarwal ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.J. VAZIFDAR, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL Present: Mr.Zora Singh Klar, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr.Alok Mittal, Advocate, for the respondent.

******* S.J.VAZIFDAR, CHIEF JUSTICE (ORAL) Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is Rs.10.39 lacs (approx.), 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 27.10. 2016

[ DEEPAK SIBAL ] shamsher JUDGE Whether reasoned/speaking : Yes / No Whether reportable : Yes / No Shamsher Singh 2016.10.27 15:51 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →