COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX JALANDHAR vs. DEEPAK MITTAL

PDF · subscribers
ITA/319/2014HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01109463201406 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The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn.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 appellant-revenue the liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal, as prayed for. The reasoning for dismissal was based on the appellant-revenue's submission that the tax effect was below the prescribed monetary limits, making it eligible for withdrawal as per CBDT circulars. The court also noted that any pending C.M. (Civil Miscellaneous) application, if any, stood disposed of as the main case was dismissed. The ratio decidendi is that appeals can be withdrawn by the revenue when the tax effect falls below the stipulated monetary limits, with potential liberty for revival.

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. The appeal challenges an order or action by an unspecified authority. The amount in dispute is not explicitly stated, but the tax effect is mentioned as being below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circulars. The procedural history is that the revenue sought to withdraw the appeal due to the low tax effect.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn by the appellant-revenue. The appellant-revenue argued that the tax effect involved in the appeal is less than the monetary limit prescribed by Circular No.3 of 2018 dated 11.07.2018, as amended by 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. Based on these circulars, 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. 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 317-5 ITA No.319 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 15:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →