THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 CHANDIGARH vs. BALJEET KAUR SEKHON

PDF · subscribers
ITA/246/2015HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01109881201501 October 2019Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI,MR. JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court decided to dismiss the appeal as withdrawn. The court granted the liberty as prayed for by the appellant-revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal in case something survived therein. The reasoning for the dismissal was based on the revenue's submission regarding the tax effect being below the monetary limit stipulated in the relevant CBDT circulars. The operative direction was to dismiss the appeal as withdrawn with the specified liberty. Any pending C.M. application was also disposed of as the main case was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Chandigarh (the appellant-revenue) filed an appeal before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh against an order concerning Baljeet Kaur Sekhon (the respondent-assessee). The appeal was filed for the assessment year(s) not specified in the judgment. The procedural history indicates that the revenue sought to withdraw the appeal. The reason for withdrawal was stated to be that the tax effect involved was below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018, as amended by Circular No. 17 of 2019 and further clarified by Letter No. F.No. 279/Misc/M-93/2018-ITJ dated 20.08.2019. The revenue requested liberty to revive the appeal if circumstances warranted.

What were the issues?

The High Court had to decide whether to allow the revenue's request to withdraw the appeal. The revenue argued that the tax effect was below the prescribed monetary limit for filing appeals, citing CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018 and Circular No. 17 of 2019, read with Letter No. F.No. 279/Misc/M-93/2018-ITJ dated 20.08.2019. The revenue requested liberty to revive the appeal if something survived therein. The judgment does not record any specific arguments from the respondent-assessee regarding the withdrawal.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

ITA No. 246 of 2015 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 222-3 ITA No. 246 of 2015 (O&M) Date of Decision : 01.10.2019 The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Chandigarh ... Appellant Versus Baljeet Kaur Sekhon

....Respondent CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL Present: Ms. Urvashi Dugga, Advocte for the appellant. Mr. M.S.Kanda, Advocate for the respondent. AJAY TEWARI, J.(ORAL) 1. Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is less than the monetary limit as prescribed in Circular No.3 of 2018 dated 11.07.2018 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, further amended vide Circular No.17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019 read with Letter No.F.No.279/Misc/M-93/2018-ITJ dated 20.08.2019, he has instructions to withdraw the present appeal. However, he prayed that liberty be granted to the appellant-revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal, in case something survives therein. 2. Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. POOJA SAINI 2019.10.04 14:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

ITA No. 246 of 2015 (O&M) 2 3. Since the main case has been dismissed, the pending C.M. application, if any, also stands disposed of. ( AJAY TEWARI ) JUDGE ( HARNARESH SINGH GILL ) 01.10.2019 JUDGE pooja saini Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No Whether reportable? Yes/No POOJA SAINI 2019.10.04 14:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →