PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 LUDHIANA vs. M/S AARTI STEEL LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA/347/2016HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01110554201622 November 2019Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI,MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The court granted the liberty to the appellant-revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal, as prayed for by its counsel. The court noted that the withdrawal was based on the tax effect being below the monetary limits prescribed by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) in its circulars. Since the main appeal was dismissed, any pending Civil Miscellaneous (C.M.) Application was also disposed of. The judgment does not provide any findings on the merits of the original dispute.

What were the facts?

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Ludhiana (the appellant-revenue) filed an appeal before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh against Aarti Steel Ltd. (the respondent-assessee). The appeal was filed against an order or action that is not specified in the provided text. The assessment year(s) are also not mentioned. The procedural history is that the appellant-revenue, through its counsel, stated that the tax effect involved was below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018 and Circular No. 17 of 2019, read with a letter dated 20.08.2019. Consequently, the revenue sought to withdraw the appeal.

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 Whether the appeal filed by the revenue should be dismissed as withdrawn, considering the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limit for filing appeals as per CBDT Circulars? The appellant-revenue argued that due to the low tax effect, which falls below the monetary limits stipulated in CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018 and Circular No. 17 of 2019, read with a subsequent letter dated 20.08.2019, it had instructions to withdraw the present appeal. The revenue also prayed for liberty to revive the appeal if any aspect of it survived. The respondent-assessee's arguments are not recorded in the judgment.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

207 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-347-2016 (O&M) Date of decision : 22.11.2019 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Ludhiana ... Appellant Versus Aarti Steel Ltd., G.T. Road, Millerganj, Ludhiana ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN Present: Mr. Chetan Sood, Advocate for the appellant. **** 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 22.11.2019 Yogesh Sharma ( ALKA SARIN ) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/ No Whether Reportable Yes/ No YOGESH SHARMA 2019.11.26 11:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →