THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, PATIALA vs. SH. MOHINDER SINGH S/O SH. MUKAND SINGH THROUGH L/H SH. SATNAM SINGH, VPO KAKRALA, SAMANA

PDF · subscribers
ITA/305/2018HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01119161201829 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The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, granting the revenue the liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed. 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 claimed by the revenue was explicitly left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate future case. The Court did not decide on the merits of the case.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax, Patiala (the revenue) against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The respondent was Shri Mohinder Singh (the assessee). The assessment year(s) are not specified. The tax effect involved in the appeal was ₹34,31,302. The revenue sought to withdraw the appeal based on Circular No. 03/2018 dated 11th July 2018, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. The revenue requested liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if anything survived.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn by the revenue, considering the tax effect and the CBDT Circular No. 03/2018. The revenue argued that due to the tax effect of ₹34,31,302, they had instructions to withdraw the appeal in accordance with Circular No. 03/2018. They also prayed for liberty to revive the appeal if circumstances warranted. The judgment does not record any arguments from the assessee.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-305-2018 (O&M) Date of Decision: 29.11.2018 The Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax, Patiala ...Appellant. Versus Shri Mohinder Singh ...Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL. PRESENT: Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Sr. Standing Counsel for the appellant. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is ` 34,31,302/-, 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 November 29, 2018 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) gbs JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No GURBACHAN SINGH 2018.11.30 10:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →