COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX LUDHIANA vs. M/S JINDAL FINE INDUSTRIES

PDF · subscribers
ITA/32/2014HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01109464201418 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The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, granting the revenue the liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for.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 construed as an affirmation of the Tribunal's order on merits. Furthermore, the legal issue, as claimed by the revenue, was left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. The operative direction was the dismissal of the appeal with liberty granted to the revenue.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ludhiana (appellant-revenue) against M/s Jindal Fine Industries, Ludhiana (respondent-assessee). The assessment year(s) are not specified. The appeal challenges an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The tax effect involved in the appeal is ₹20,18,090. The revenue sought to withdraw the appeal based on CBDT Circular No. 03/2018 dated 11th July, 2018. The revenue also requested liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if any issue survived.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn by the revenue. The revenue argued that due to the tax effect being below the threshold stipulated in CBDT Circular No. 03/2018, they have instructions to withdraw the appeal. They also sought liberty to revive the appeal if circumstances warranted. The assessee's arguments are not recorded in the judgment. The issue turns on the application of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018 and the court's discretion regarding withdrawal and liberty to revive.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-32-2014 Date of Decision: 18.7.2018 Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ludhiana ...Appellant. Versus M/s Jindal Fine Industries, Ludhiana ...Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN. PRESENT: Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Sr. Standing Counsel for the appellant. Mr. Rajiv Sharma, Advocate for the respondent. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is ` 20,18,090/-, 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 18, 2018 (AVNEESH JHINGAN) gbs JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Gurbachan Singh 2018.07.20 11:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →