PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2 CHANDIGARH vs. M/S GILLARD ELECTRONICS P LTD C-132 PHASE-8 INDL. AREA MOHALI

PDF · subscribers
ITA/252/2016HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01110449201614 March 2017Bench: MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA,MRS JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY1 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue. The reasoning for dismissal was based on the low tax effect of ₹58,544/-, following the precedent set by the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Dhanalekshmi Bank Ltd. The Court clarified that this dismissal should not be construed as an affirmation of the ITAT's order on merits. The legal issue that the Revenue wished to have adjudicated was expressly left open to be decided in an appropriate future case. Therefore, no specific finding on the merits of the case was made by the High Court.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Chandigarh (Revenue) against M/s Gillard Electronics Pvt. Ltd. (assessee). The assessment year(s) are not specified in the judgment. The order under challenge is an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The amount in dispute, referred to as the tax effect, is ₹58,544/-. The procedural history is that the Revenue has filed the present appeal before the High Court.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be entertained given the low tax effect? (Question of law) The Revenue contended that the appeal should be decided on merits. The assessee did not present any specific arguments in the provided text. The High Court, however, relied on the Supreme Court's decision in 'Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Dhanalekshmi Bank Ltd., [2015] 373 ITR 526 (SC)' which dismissed an appeal due to low tax effect without deciding the merits, leaving the question of law open.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 213 ITA No.252 of 2016 (O&M) Date of Decision: March 14, 2017 The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Chandigarh ....Appellant versus M/s Gillard Electronics Pvt. Ltd. ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMENDRA JAIN ***** Present: Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Advocate for the appellant-Revenue. Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate for the respondent. ***** AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J.

(Oral)

A perusal of the record shows that the tax effect involved in the present case is ` 58,544/-. In view of the order of the Apex Court in 'Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Dhanalekshmi Bank Ltd., [2015] 373 ITR 526 (SC)', where the Supreme Court had dismissed the appeal without going into the merits of the appeal due to low tax effect leaving the question of law open, the present appeal is dismissed. It is, however, clarified that dismissal of the appeal 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. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE (RAMENDRA JAIN) March 14, 2017

JUDGE sonia gugnani Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No Whether reportable? Yes/No Sonia Kinra 2017.03.15 14:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →