COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II LUDHIANA vs. SANJEEV KUMAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA/354/2014HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01109501201420 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The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, granting the liberty to the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for.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 ITAT's order on merits. Furthermore, the Court explicitly stated that the legal issue, as claimed by the revenue, was being left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. This means the merits of the case were not decided, and the specific legal question raised by the revenue remains undecided.

What were the facts?

The Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Ludhiana (appellant-revenue) filed an appeal before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The respondent is Sanjeev Kumar. The appeal pertains to assessment year(s) not specified in the judgment. The tax effect involved in the appeal is ₹ 24,91,209/-. The revenue sought to withdraw the appeal based on Circular No. 03/2018 dated 11th July, 2018, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT). The revenue also requested liberty to revive the appeal if any aspect survived.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn by the revenue, considering the tax effect and the CBDT Circular No. 03/2018. The revenue argued that due to the tax effect being ₹ 24,91,209/-, they had instructions to withdraw the appeal in accordance with CBDT Circular No. 03/2018. They requested liberty to revive the appeal if circumstances warranted. The respondent did not record any arguments in the judgment.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-354-2014 Date of Decision: 20.7.2018 The Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Ludhiana ...Appellant. Versus Sanjeev Kumar ...Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN. PRESENT: Mr. Z.S. Klar, Sr. Standing Counsel for the appellant. Mr. Saurabh Gulia, Advocate for the respondent. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is ` 24,91,209/-, 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. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE July 20, 2018 (AVNEESH JHINGAN) gbs JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Gurbachan Singh 2018.07.24 15:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →