COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX I vs. M/S HARI CHAD & CO
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The court granted the revenue the liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for. It was 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. No specific finding was given on the merits of the case.
What were the facts?
The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar-I (appellant-revenue) against M/s Hari Chand & Company, Hoshiarpur (respondent-assessee). The appeal pertains to an assessment year not specified in the judgment. The order under challenge is that of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The tax effect involved in the appeal is ₹27,73,000/-. The appeal was filed before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the appeal filed by the revenue should be withdrawn in view of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018 dated 11th July, 2018, concerning the monetary limit for filing appeals. The revenue argued that as the tax effect is ₹27,73,000/-, which is below the threshold specified in the circular, they have instructions to withdraw the appeal. The revenue also prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survives therein. 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 & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-272-2012 (O&M) Date of Decision: 24.9.2018 Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar-I, Jalandhar ...Appellant. Versus M/s Hari Chand & Company, Hoshiarpur ...Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN. PRESENT: Mr. Vivek Sethi, Sr. Standing Counsel for the appellant. Mr. Manpreet Singh Kanda, Advocate for the respondent. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is ` 27,73,000/-, he has instructions to withdraw the present appeal in view of Circular No.03/2018, dated 11th July, 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. 2. Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for.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. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE September 24, 2018 (AVNEESH JHINGAN) gbs JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No GURBACHAN SINGH 2018.09.27 16:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Basudev Logistics, Jagatsinghpur vs. Principal Commissioner, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Prabhudatta Mishra vs. The Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes And Goods And Services Tax, OdishaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Rajesh Kumar Gupta vs. Joint Commissioner Of GST (Appeal), Territorial Range, BolangirOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Attitude Exim PVT. LTD., Rourkela vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S.Pradeep Kumar Mahapatra, Bhubaneswar vs. Superintendent Bhubaneswar-Iii Circle, CGST Range, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
