COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX JALANDHAR vs. DEEPAK MITTAL

PDF · subscribers
ITA/297/2014HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01109438201406 September 2019Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI,MR. JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The court granted the liberty as prayed for by the appellant-revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal. The reasoning for dismissal was based on the appellant-revenue's submission that the tax effect was below the monetary limit prescribed by the CBDT circulars, making it no longer financially viable to pursue the appeal. The ratio decidendi is that appeals can be withdrawn by the revenue when the tax effect falls below stipulated monetary limits, with a possibility of revival under specific conditions. Any pending applications related to the main appeal were also disposed of as a consequence of the dismissal.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Jalandhar (appellant-revenue) against Shri Deepak Mittal (respondent-assessee). The assessment year(s) are not specified in the judgment. The appeal challenges an order or action that is not detailed. The procedural history relevant to this judgment is that the revenue sought to withdraw the appeal. The reason for withdrawal was that the tax effect involved was below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018 and Circular No. 17 of 2019, read with a letter dated 20.08.2019.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn by the appellant-revenue, considering the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limit for appeals, and if liberty should be granted to revive the appeal. The appellant-revenue argued that due to the low tax effect, as per CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018 and Circular No. 17 of 2019, they have instructions to withdraw the appeal. They further prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if circumstances change. The respondent-assessee's arguments are not recorded in the judgment.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 317 ITA No.297 of 2014 (O&M) Date of decision : 06.09.2019 Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Jalandhar ...... Appellant versus Shri Deepak Mittal C/o Sonalika Agrl. Industries ...... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL Present : Mr. Vivek Sethi, Senior Standing counsel with Mr. Varun Issar, Junior Standing counsel for the appellant. Mr. Akshay Bhan, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Alok Mittal, Advocate and Mr. Shantanu Bnasal, Advocate for the respondent-Assesse.

AJAY TEWARI, J. (Oral) 1. 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. 3. Since the main case has been dismissed, the pending C.M., if any, also stands disposed of. (AJAY TEWARI) JUDGE (HARNARESH SINGH GILL) JUDGE 06.09.2019 anuradha Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No Anuradha 2019.09.11 15:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →