COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S ST. JUDES CONVENT SCHOOL, NAKODAR PAN: AAETS3007K

PDF · subscribers
ITA/285/2017HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01117486201723 August 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The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, granting the revenue liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for.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 claimed by the revenue was left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. The miscellaneous application (CM-13581-CII-2017) was also dismissed as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Chandigarh (the revenue) against M/s St. Jude's Convent School, Nakodar (the assessee). The appeal challenged an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The tax effect involved in the appeal was ₹9,27,122. The High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh was hearing the appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the revenue should be permitted to withdraw the appeal, given the tax effect and CBDT Circular No. 03/2018. Assessee's Contentions: Not recorded. Revenue's Contentions: The learned counsel for the appellant-revenue stated that due to the tax effect of ₹9,27,122, he had instructions to withdraw the appeal in accordance with Circular No. 03/2018, dated 11th July 2018, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. The revenue prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survives therein.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-285-2017 (O&M) Date of Decision: 23.8.2018 The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Chandigarh ...Appellant. Versus M/s St. Jude's Convent School, Nakodar ...Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN. PRESENT: Mr. Denesh Goyal, Sr. Standing Counsel for the appellant. Mr. Ajay Vohra, Senior Advocate with Mr. Rohit Jain, Advocate and Mr. Aniket D. Aggarwal, Advocate for the respondent. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is ` 9,27,122/-, 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. 3. CM-13581-CII-2017 is also dismissed as withdrawn. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE August 23, 2018 (AVNEESH JHINGAN) gbs JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No GURBACHAN SINGH 2018.08.28 14:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →