COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX JALANDHAR-I vs. M/S KAPSONS INDUSTRIES LTD. JALANDHAR
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, granting the revenue the liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for.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 Tribunal's order on merits. Furthermore, the legal issue, as claimed by the revenue, was left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. The operative direction was the dismissal of the appeal as withdrawn with liberty granted.
What were the facts?
The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar-I (the revenue) against M/s Kapsons Industries Limited (the assessee). The assessment year(s) are not explicitly stated. The appeal challenges an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The amount in dispute is Rs. 23,30,295/-. The procedural history is that the revenue's counsel, citing CBDT Circular No. 03/2018 dated 11.07.2018, sought to withdraw the appeal due to the tax effect.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the appeal filed by the revenue should be dismissed as withdrawn in light of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018, considering the tax effect involved (Question of law). The revenue argued that due to the tax effect of Rs. 23,30,295/-, it had instructions to withdraw the appeal in accordance with CBDT Circular No. 03/2018. The revenue also prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something further survived. The judgment does not record any arguments from the assessee.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No.25 of 2017 (O&M) Date of Decision :15.12.2018 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar-I, Jalandhar ......Appellant Versus M/s Kapsons Industries Limited, Jalandhar ...... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNA MURARI, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ARUN PALLI, JUDGE Present : Mr. Vivek Sethi, Advocate for the appellant. KRISHNA MURARI, CHIEF JUSTICE
(Oral)
: Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is Rs.23,30,295/-, he has instructions to withdraw the present appeal in view of Circular No.03/2018, dated 11.07.2018 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, New Delhi. However, he has prayed that liberty be granted to the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal in case something survives therein. 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. (KRISHNA MURARI) CHIEF JUSTICE (ARUN PALLI) JUDGE 15.12.2018
Manoj Bhutani
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No MANOJ KUMAR 2018.12.18 10:43 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Namita Behera vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Ratul Boro vs. The Union Of INDIA And 4 OrsGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- Jashwant Sharma vs. The Union Of INDIA And A4 OrsGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Jeyarani Shopping Centre vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer -1/The Deputy Commercial Tax OfficerMadras · 14 Oct 2026
- Rohan Tanna vs. Directorate General Of Goods And Services Tax IntelligenceChhattisgarh · 14 Oct 2026
