PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, LUDHIANA vs. M/S AVON ISPAT AND POWER LTD.
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn with liberty granted to the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal, as prayed for.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, as claimed by the revenue, was left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. No finding was reached on the merits of the case, and the operative direction was to dismiss the appeal as withdrawn with liberty.
What were the facts?
The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Ludhiana (the revenue) against M/s Avon Ispat & Power Ltd. (the assessee). The assessment year(s) are not specified in the provided text. The appeal challenges an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The amount in dispute is not explicitly stated, but the tax effect is mentioned as less than Rs. 50 lacs. The procedural history is limited to the filing of the appeal by the revenue.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the appeal should be withdrawn by the revenue in light of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018, dated 11.07.2018, due to the tax effect being less than Rs. 50 lacs? (Question of procedure/policy) Assessee's Contention: Not recorded. Revenue's Contention: The learned counsel for the appellant-revenue stated that they have instructions to withdraw the present appeal in view of Circular No. 03/2018, dated 11.07.2018, as the tax effect involved is less than Rs. 50 lacs. They prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survives therein.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
ITA-327-2016(O&M)
Date of decision: 28.03.2019
Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Ludhiana … Appellant Versus M/s Avon Ispat & Power Ltd. … Respondent
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA MURARI,
CHIEF JUSTICE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI, JUDGE
Present: Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Advocate, for the appellant.
*** KRISHNA MURARI, C.J. (Oral)
Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is less than Rs.50 lacs, he has instructions to withdraw the present appeal in view of Circular No. 03/2018, dated 11.07.2018 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.
( Krishna Murari )
Chief Justice
28.03.2019 Rajan
( Arun Palli ) Judge
Whether speaking / reasoned:
YES
Whether Reportable:
RAJAN KUMAR 2019.04.02 11:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sunanda Raul vs. The Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes And Goods Nad Services Tax, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Zakir Hussain Ali Khan vs. Additional Commissioner (Appeals), BhubaneswarOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Manorama Nayak, Khorda vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Bhubaneswar Iv Circle, KhurdaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Chandan Kumar Bathual vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, Cuttack-Iii Range, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Manoranjan Sadangi vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, Gopalpur Range, GanjamOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
