PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX PANCHKULA vs. NACHHATAR SINGH

PDF · subscribers
ITA/288/2019HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01061426201921 April 2022Bench: MR. JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA,MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The court granted liberty to the appellant-revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal, as prayed. It was 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 claimed by the appellant-revenue was left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. Any pending C.M. Application, if any, was also disposed of as the main case was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula (appellant-revenue) against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The respondent was Nachhatar Singh. The specific assessment year(s) and the order of the ITAT under challenge are not detailed in the provided text. The procedural history is limited to the revenue's decision to withdraw the appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be withdrawn by the appellant-revenue due to the tax effect being below the prescribed monetary limit as per CBDT Circulars No. 3 of 2018 and 17 of 2019, and Letter No. F.No.279/Misc/M-93/2018-ITJ dated 20.08.2019. Assessee's Contentions: Not recorded. Revenue's Contentions: The learned counsel for the appellant-revenue stated that the tax effect involved is less than the monetary limit prescribed in the relevant CBDT circulars and letters. Therefore, the revenue had instructions to withdraw the present appeal. The revenue also 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 AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-288-2019 (O&M) Date of decision: 21.04.2022 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula .... Appellant Versus Nachhatar Singh .... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN Present: Mr. Yogesh Putney, Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant. ****

TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA, J (ORAL) Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is less than the monetary limit as prescribed in Circular No.3 of 2018 dated 11.07.2018 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, further amended vide Circular No.17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019 read with Letter No.F.No.279/Misc/M-93/2018-ITJ dated 20.08.2019, he has instructions to withdraw the present appeal. However, he prayed that liberty be granted to the appellant-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 appellant-revenue shall not be taken to be affirmation of order of the Tribunal on merits. Further, the legal issue as claimed by the appellant-revenue is being left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. DINESH KUMAR 2022.04.25 11:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

ITA-288-2019 (O&M) -2- 3. Since the main case has been dismissed, the pending C.M. Application, if any, also stands disposed of. (TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA) JUDGE (PANKAJ JAIN)

JUDGE 21.04.2022 Dinesh

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes

Whether Reportable : No DINESH KUMAR 2022.04.25 11:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →