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

PDF · subscribers
ITA/235/2011HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01095560201127 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The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn with liberty granted to the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for.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 case. No specific findings on the merits of the case were made as the appeal was withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Ludhiana (appellant-revenue) against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The respondent was Sh. Shiv Parshad Aggarwal. The tax effect involved in the appeal was approximately Rs. 10.39 lacs. The appeal was decided on October 27, 2016, by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the appeal filed by the revenue should be withdrawn. The revenue, represented by its counsel, stated that it had instructions to withdraw the appeal due to the tax effect being approximately Rs. 10.39 lacs, in accordance with Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10.12.2015 issued by the CBDT. The revenue also prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survived therein. 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 (16)

ITA-235-2011 (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 →