PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX PANCHKULA vs. SUBODH PARKASH

PDF · subscribers
ITA/355/2016HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01110563201604 September 2019Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI,MR. JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The revenue, represented by its counsel, stated that it had instructions to withdraw the appeal due to the tax effect being below the prescribed monetary limits as per recent CBDT circulars. The revenue specifically prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if circumstances warranted it. The Court granted this liberty. Consequently, any pending civil miscellaneous applications related to the main appeal were also disposed of.

What were the facts?

This case involves an appeal filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula (the revenue) against an order concerning Mr. Subodh Parkash (the assessee). The assessment year(s) are not explicitly stated in the provided text. The appeal challenges a decision made by an authority below, though the specific authority and the nature of the order are not detailed. The amount in dispute is also not specified. The procedural history is limited to the revenue's decision to withdraw the present appeal.

What were the issues?

The Tribunal was not required to decide any substantive issues of law or fact. The sole matter before the Tribunal was the revenue's request to withdraw the appeal. The revenue's contention was based on the tax effect involved being below the monetary limit prescribed in CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018, as amended by Circular No. 17 of 2019 and further clarified by Letter No. F.No.279/Misc/M-93/2018-ITJ dated 20.08.2019. The assessee's arguments are not recorded as the appeal was withdrawn before any substantive arguments were presented.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

ITA No. 355 of 2016 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 1240 ITA No. 355 of 2016 (O&M) Date of Decision : 04.09.2019 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula ... Appellant Versus Mr. Subodh Parkash

....Respondent CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL Present: Mr. Yogesh Putney, 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. POOJA SAINI 2019.09.10 12:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

ITA No. 355 of 2016 (O&M) 2 3. Since the main case has been dismissed, the pending C.M. application, if any, also stands disposed of. ( AJAY TEWARI ) JUDGE ( HARNARESH SINGH GILL ) 04.09.2019 JUDGE pooja saini Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No Whether reportable? Yes/No POOJA SAINI 2019.09.10 12:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →