COMMISSIONER OFINCOME TAX LUDHIANA vs. MUNISH KUMAR GOYAL

PDF · subscribers
ITA/329/2014HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01109474201426 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The High Court dismissed the revenue's appeal as withdrawn, granting the revenue liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survived therein. The Court clarified that the withdrawal would not be considered an affirmation of the ITAT's order on merits, and the legal issue claimed by the revenue was left open for adjudication in an appropriate case. The Court also ordered the withdrawal of the respondent's cross-objections and the applications filed therewith, as prayed for by the respondent's counsel. The judgment does not delve into the merits of the original dispute or the ITAT's decision.

What were the facts?

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ludhiana (the revenue) filed an appeal before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The appeal was filed for assessment year(s) not specified in the judgment. The amount in dispute was ₹38,01,250. The revenue's counsel sought to withdraw the appeal based on CBDT Circular No. 03/2018, dated 11th July, 2018, which pertains to the monetary limit for filing appeals. The respondent (assessee, Shri Munish Kumar Goyal) also sought withdrawal of his cross-objections and related applications.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the revenue should be permitted to withdraw its appeal against the ITAT order, given the tax effect and CBDT Circular No. 03/2018. The revenue argued that due to the tax effect being ₹38,01,250, it had instructions to withdraw the appeal in line with the aforementioned CBDT circular. The revenue also prayed for liberty to revive the appeal if circumstances warranted. 2. Whether the respondent's cross-objections and associated applications should be permitted to be withdrawn. The respondent prayed for the withdrawal of these. The judgment does not record any specific arguments from the respondent regarding the revenue's appeal, other than their prayer for withdrawal of their own cross-objections.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-329-2014 and X-Obj-189-CII-2015 (O&M) Date of Decision: 26.7.2018 The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ludhiana ...Appellant. Versus Shri Munish Kumar Goyal ...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. Sachin Bhardwaj, Advocate and Mr. Divya Suri, Advocate for the respondent. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is ` 38,01,250/-, 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. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent prays for withdrawal of the cross-objections and the applications filed therewith. 4. Ordered accordingly. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE July 26, 2018 (AVNEESH JHINGAN) gbs JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Gurbachan Singh 2018.08.01 12:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →