THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (TDS)-1, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S AREA MANAGER, DISTRICT OFFICE, FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA, SANGRUR (TAN: PTLF10133E)

PDF · subscribers
ITA/338/2018HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01119197201822 October 2018Bench: MR. JUSTICE R.C. KATHURIA (RETD.),MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, granting the revenue liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for.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 Tribunal's order on merits. Furthermore, the legal issue claimed by the revenue was explicitly left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. The Court did not decide the merits of the case.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS)-I, Chandigarh (appellant-revenue) against M/s Area Manager, District Office, Food Corporation of India, Sangrur (respondent-assessee). The appeal concerned an assessment year not specified in the judgment. The order under challenge was passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The tax effect involved was ₹44,41,636. The appeal was filed with a delay of 109 days in refiling, which was condoned by the High Court.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the revenue should be dismissed as withdrawn in view of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018, dated 11th July, 2018, given the tax effect involved? The revenue argued that due to the tax effect being ₹44,41,636, it had instructions to withdraw the appeal in accordance with CBDT Circular No. 03/2018. The revenue also prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survived therein. The judgment does not record any arguments from the assessee.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-338-2018 (O&M) Date of Decision: 22.10.2018 The Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS)-I, Chandigarh ...Appellant. Versus M/s Area Manager, District Office, Food Corporation of India, Sangrur ...Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN. PRESENT: Mr. Denesh Goyal, Sr. Standing Counsel for the appellant. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. Delay of 109 days in refiling the appeal is condoned. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is ` 44,41,636/-, 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. 3. 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 October 22, 2018 (AVNEESH JHINGAN) gbs JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No GURBACHAN SINGH 2018.10.26 16:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →