COMMISSIONNER OF INCOME TAX-I AMRITSAR vs. MADAN LAL

PDF · subscribers
ITA/307/2014HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01109450201420 July 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The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, granting the revenue the liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for.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 The operative direction was the dismissal of the appeal as withdrawn with liberty granted.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Amritsar (the revenue) against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The respondent was Shri Madan Lal. The tax effect involved in the appeal was ₹32,52,674. 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 any aspect survived. The High Court considered the withdrawal request.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal can be withdrawn by the revenue based on the CBDT Circular No. 03/2018, given the tax effect involved? The revenue argued that due to the tax effect being ₹32,52,674, which falls within the monetary limits prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 03/2018, they had instructions to withdraw the present appeal. They further prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal in case something survived therein. The judgment does not record any arguments from the respondent.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-307-2014 Date of Decision: 20.7.2018 The Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Amritsar ...Appellant. Versus Shri Madan Lal ...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. None for the respondent. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is ` 32,52,674/-, 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 July 20, 2018 (AVNEESH JHINGAN) gbs JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Gurbachan Singh 2018.07.23 14:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →