PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR-2, JALANDHAR vs. M/S. PUNJAB GRAMIN BANK LTD.

PDF · subscribers
ITA/286/2018HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01119139201828 November 2018Bench: MR. JUSTICE R.C. KATHURIA (RETD.),MR. JUSTICE HARINDER SINGH SIDHU1 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The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn with liberty granted to the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for.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 ITAT'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 Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Jalandhar (appellant-revenue) against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The respondent was M/s Punjab Gramin Bank Ltd. The tax effect involved in the appeal was ₹ 24,98,265. The appeal was decided on November 28, 2018.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn by the revenue, considering the tax effect and CBDT Circular No. 03/2018. Contentions: Assessee: No specific contentions are recorded for the assessee as the appeal was withdrawn by the revenue. Revenue: The revenue, through its counsel, stated that due to the tax effect of ₹ 24,98,265, it had instructions to withdraw the appeal in view of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018, dated July 11, 2018. The revenue also prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if anything survived.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No. 286 of 2018 (O&M) Decided on : 28.11.2018 The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Jalandhar . . . Appellant(s) Versus M/s Punjab Gramin Bank Ltd. . . . Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL PRESENT: Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Sr. Standing Counsel for Mr. Vivek Sethi, Sr. Standing Counsel for the appellant(s). **** AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (Oral) Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is ` 24,98,265/-, he has instructions to withdraw the present appeal in view of the circular No.03/2018, dated 11th July, 2018, issued by the C.B.D.T., New Delhi. However, he 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 November 28, 2018 J.Ram (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No JAWALA RAM 2018.11.29 13:12 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →