COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CHANDIGARH vs. M/S NATIONAL HORTICULTURE BOARD 85 INSTITUTIONAL AREA GURGAON

PDF · subscribers
ITA/331/2016HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01110537201629 January 2020Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI,MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The reasoning was based on the appellant-revenue's submission that the tax effect was below the monetary limit stipulated by CBDT Circulars, which justified the withdrawal. The Court granted the liberty sought by the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal, should something survive therein. The pending C.M. (Civil Miscellaneous application), if any, was also disposed of as a consequence of the main appeal being dismissed as withdrawn. No specific issue was decided on merits, and no ratio decidendi for future cases on substantive legal points was established.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Chandigarh (appellant-revenue) against M/s. National Horticulture Board (respondent). The assessment year(s) are not specified. The appeal challenges an order or action from an unspecified authority. The amount in dispute is not stated. The procedural history is that the revenue sought to withdraw the appeal due to the tax effect being below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circulars.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn based on the tax effect being below the prescribed monetary limit for appeals by the revenue? The appellant-revenue argued that the tax effect involved is less than the monetary limit prescribed in Circular No. 3 of 2018 dated 11.07.2018, as amended by Circular No. 17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019 and Letter No. F.No.279/Misc/M-93/2018-ITJ dated 20.08.2019. Consequently, they have instructions to withdraw the appeal. The revenue also prayed for liberty to revive the appeal if circumstances change. The respondent's contentions 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 201-4

ITA-331-2016(O&M) Date of decision :29.1.2020 The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Chandigarh ...... Appellant versus M/s. National Horticulture Board ...... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN Present : Mr. Denesh Goyal, Sr. Standing counsel for the appellant. Mr. Sanjeev Singh, Advocate for the respondents.

*** 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 as withdrawn, the pending C.M, if any also stands disposed of. (AJAY TEWARI) JUDGE (AVNEESH JHINGAN) JUDGE 29.1.2020 anuradha Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No ANURADHA 2020.01.30 16:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →