COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S GREATWAY PRIVATE LTD.
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The reasoning provided is that the learned counsel for the appellant-revenue, based on instructions, sought to withdraw the appeal because the tax effect involved was less than the monetary limit prescribed by Circular No.3 of 2018, as amended by Circular No.17 of 2019 and Letter No.F.No.279/Misc/M-93/2018-ITJ dated 20.08.2019. The court granted liberty to the appellant-revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal, in case something survives therein. As the main case was dismissed, any pending C.M. Application was also disposed of.
What were the facts?
The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Ludhiana (appellant-revenue) against M/s. Greatway Private Limited, Ludhiana (respondent-assessee). The assessment year(s) are not specified in the provided text. The appeal challenges an order or action from an unspecified authority. The amount in dispute is not explicitly stated, but the tax effect is mentioned as being below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT circulars. The procedural history is limited to the present appeal before the High Court.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the appeal filed by the revenue should be dismissed as withdrawn, considering the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limit as per CBDT Circular No.3 of 2018 and Circular No.17 of 2019. Contentions: Assessee: No specific contentions are recorded for the assessee in the provided text. Revenue: The learned counsel for the appellant-revenue stated that due to the tax effect being less than the monetary limit prescribed in CBDT Circular No.3 of 2018, as amended by Circular No.17 of 2019 and Letter No.F.No.279/Misc/M-93/2018-ITJ dated 20.08.2019, they have instructions to withdraw the appeal. The revenue 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 No.339 of 2006 Date of decision : 06.11.2019 Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Ludhiana. ..... Appellant versus M/s. Greatway Private Limited, Ludhiana .....Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE ALKA SARIN *** Present : Mr.Sandeep Goyal, Advocate and Mr.Chetan Sood, Advocate for the appellant. Mr.Alok Mittal, Advocate for the respondent.
*** 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, the pending C.M. Application, if any, also stands disposed of. (AJAY TEWARI) JUDGE ( ALKA SARIN ) JUDGE 06.11.2019 raman Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No RAMAN KUMAR 2019.11.08 09:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Basudev Logistics, Jagatsinghpur vs. Principal Commissioner, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Prabhudatta Mishra vs. The Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes And Goods And Services Tax, OdishaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Rajesh Kumar Gupta vs. Joint Commissioner Of GST (Appeal), Territorial Range, BolangirOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Attitude Exim PVT. LTD., Rourkela vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S.Pradeep Kumar Mahapatra, Bhubaneswar vs. Superintendent Bhubaneswar-Iii Circle, CGST Range, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
