PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX LUDHIANA vs. HARVINDER PAL SINGLA

PDF · subscribers
ITA/246/2016HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01110442201622 January 2025Bench: MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI,MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court decided that the appeal was not maintainable due to the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 5 of 2024. The reasoning was based on the submission by the assessee's counsel regarding the circular's provisions. The Revenue's counsel conceded to this point and agreed that the appeal should be disposed of as not pressed. The ratio decidendi is that appeals filed by the Revenue that fall below the prescribed monetary limit by a CBDT circular are not maintainable and should be dismissed or disposed of as not pressed. The operative direction was to dispose of the appeal accordingly. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ludhiana (the Revenue) against Harvinder Pal Singla (the assessee). The assessment year(s) are not specified in the judgment. The order or action under challenge is the appeal itself, filed before the High Court. The amount in dispute is not stated. The procedural history is that the Revenue filed the present appeal before the High Court. During the hearing, the assessee's counsel pointed out that the monetary limit for filing appeals, as per CBDT Circular No. 5 of 2024 dated September 17, 2024, is less than Rs. 2 crores, rendering the appeal not maintainable. The Revenue's counsel conceded to this submission.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the present appeal is maintainable in light of the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 5 of 2024? (Question of law) Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the monetary limit for filing appeals, as per CBDT Circular No. 5 of 2024, is less than Rs. 2 crores, and therefore, the present appeal is not maintainable. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue, through its counsel, fairly submitted that in view of the aforementioned circular, the appeal should be disposed of as not pressed. The Revenue also reserved the right to seek restoration of the appeal if any cause of action, dispute, or interest still survived.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-246-2016(O&M) Date of decision: 22.01.2025 The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ludhiana … Appellant Versus Harvinder Pal Singla … Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA Present: Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Senior Standing Counsel, for the appellant-Revenue. Ms. Urvashi Dugga, Advocate, Mr. Divya Suri and Mr. Yogesh Kumar Mittal, Advocates, for the respondent. *** ARUN PALLI, J. (Oral) Learned counsel for the respondent submits, for the monetary limit per the circular No.5 of 2024, dated September 17, 2024, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, is less than Rs.2 crores, the present appeal would no longer be maintainable. Learned counsel for the Revenue, as always, fairly submits that in the wake of the circular, referred to above, the appeal be disposed of as not pressed. However, in case any cause of action, dispute or interest still survives, the appellant would move appropriate application for its restoration and decision on merits. Ordered accordingly. ( Arun Palli )

Judge 22.01.2025 Rajan ( Sudeepti Sharma ) Judge Whether speaking / reasoned: YES/NO Whether Reportable: YES/NO RAJAN KUMAR 2025.01.23 11:01 I am approving this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →