PR. COMMOISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), GURGAON vs. SH. AKSHAY VERMA

PDF · subscribers
ITA/365/2017HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01117575201718 September 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The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, granting the revenue the liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for.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, as claimed by the revenue, was left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. The Court did not decide the substantive merits of the case.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Gurgaon (the revenue) against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The respondent is Shri Akshay Verma. The tax effect involved in the appeal was ₹8,40,827. The revenue's counsel, Mr. Rajesh Sethi, sought to withdraw the appeal in accordance with Circular No. 03/2018 dated 11th July, 2018, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. The revenue also requested liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if circumstances warranted it.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn by the revenue in light of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018, and if liberty should be granted to revive the appeal. The revenue argued that the tax effect was below the threshold stipulated in the circular, justifying withdrawal. The revenue also sought liberty to revive the appeal. The judgment does not record any arguments from the respondent.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-365-2017 Date of Decision: 18.9.2018 Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Gurgaon ...Appellant. Versus Shri Akshay Verma ...Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN. PRESENT: Mr. Rajesh Sethi, Sr. Standing Counsel for the appellant. None for the respondent. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is ` 8,40,827/-, 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 September 18, 2018 (AVNEESH JHINGAN) gbs JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No GURBACHAN SINGH 2018.09.25 15:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →