PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL LUDHIANA vs. NARAIN SINGLA PROP

PDF · subscribers
ITA/285/2016HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01110485201620 July 2018Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL,MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn with liberty granted to the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for.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 claimed by the revenue was left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. The specific findings of the ITAT on the merits of the case were not discussed or decided by the High Court.

What were the facts?

The appellant, Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ludhiana, filed an appeal against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The respondent is Shri Narain Singla. The appeal was filed for the assessment year(s) not specified in the judgment. The amount in dispute is ₹24,65,790. The revenue sought to withdraw the appeal based on CBDT Circular No. 03/2018.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the revenue is permitted to withdraw the appeal in light of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018, and if so, whether liberty should be granted to revive the appeal. The revenue, through its learned counsel, stated that due to the tax effect of ₹24,65,790, it had instructions to withdraw the present appeal in view of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018, dated 11th July, 2018. The revenue 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 respondent.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-285-2016 Date of Decision: 20.7.2018 The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ludhiana ...Appellant. Versus Shri Narain Singla ...Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN. PRESENT: Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Sr. Standing Counsel for the appellant. Mr. Vishal Gupta, Advocate for the respondent. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is ` 24,65,790/-, 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 July 20, 2018 (AVNEESH JHINGAN) gbs JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Gurbachan Singh 2018.07.23 14:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →