PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX LUDHIANA vs. HARVINDER PAL SINGLA
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The dismissal was based on the appellant-revenue's submission that the tax effect was below the monetary limit stipulated in the relevant CBDT circulars, which instructed the withdrawal of such appeals. The Court granted the revenue the liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal, should circumstances warrant it. The operative direction was the dismissal of the appeal with the specified liberty. No specific findings on the merits of the case were made, as the appeal was withdrawn before any substantive adjudication. Any pending interlocutory applications were also disposed of as a consequence of the main appeal's dismissal.
What were the facts?
The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ludhiana (the appellant-revenue) filed an appeal before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh against an order concerning Shri Harvinder Pal Singla (the respondent-assessee). The appeal was filed for assessment year(s) not specified in the judgment. The specific order or action under challenge and the authority that passed it are not detailed. The amount in dispute is also not stated. The procedural history is limited to the filing of the present appeal by the revenue.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the appeal filed by the revenue should be dismissed as withdrawn, considering the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limit as per CBDT Circulars? The appellant-revenue argued that the tax effect involved in the appeal is less than the monetary limit prescribed in Circular No. 3 of 2018 dated 11.07.2018, as amended by 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. Based on these circulars, the revenue sought to withdraw the appeal. The revenue also prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survives therein. The respondent-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 342-3 ITA No.247 of 2016 (O&M) Date of decision : 09.09.2019 The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) Ludhiana ...... Appellant versus Shri Harvinder Pal Singla ...... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL Present : Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Senior Standing counsel with Ms. Pridhi Jaswinder Sandhu, Junior Standing counsel for the appellant. Mr. Divya Suri, 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. 3. Since the main case has been dismissed, the pending C.M., if any, also stands disposed of. (AJAY TEWARI) JUDGE (HARNARESH SINGH GILL) JUDGE 09.09.2019 anuradha Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No Anuradha 2019.09.13 15:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sh Umang Uniyal vs. Commissioner Department Of Central Goods And Services TaxUttarakhand · 16 Oct 2026
- Shivaraj M S vs. The Union Of INDIAKarnataka · 15 Oct 2026
- Paresh Textiles Prop Paresh Gudhka vs. Superintendent Range Iv Div VBombay · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Palladium Constructions PVT LTD. vs. Principal Commissioner Of Central TaxKarnataka · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Vk Construction vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - IiMadras · 15 Oct 2026
