PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, PATIALA vs. SH. SUKHDEV SINGH HTC, DHANAULA, H.O. SUNAM PAN: ABLFS1449R

PDF · subscribers
ITA/320/2017HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01117526201719 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The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, granting the revenue the liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for.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 ITAT's order on merits. Furthermore, the legal issue, as claimed by the revenue, was left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. No specific finding was given on the merits of the case, as the appeal was withdrawn.

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 assessment year(s) are not explicitly stated. The amount in dispute is stated to be ₹31,76,325/-. The procedural history involves the revenue's decision to withdraw the appeal based on a CBDT circular.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the revenue is permitted to withdraw the appeal. The revenue, through its learned counsel, stated that due to the tax effect being ₹31,76,325/-, it had instructions to withdraw the present appeal in view of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018 dated 11th July, 2018. The revenue also prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survives therein. The judgment does not record any arguments from the respondent (assessee).

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No. 320 of 2017 Decided on : 19.07.2018 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala . . . Appellant(s) Versus Sh. Sukhdev Singh HTC . . . Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN PRESENT: Mr. Z.S. Klar, Sr. Standing Counsel for the appellant(s). Mr. Munish Kumar Singla, Advocate for the respondent(s). **** AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (Oral) Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is ` 31,76,325/-, he has instructions to withdraw the present appeal in view of the circular No.03/2018, dated 11th July, 2018, issued by the C.B.D.T., New Delhi. However, he 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 19, 2018 J.Ram (AVNEESH JHINGAN) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No Jawala Ram 2018.07.20 16:47 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →