COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX GURGAON vs. M/S AMIRA FOODS INDIA LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA/37/2013HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01105241201316 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The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, granting liberty to the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for.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 legal issue claimed by the revenue was left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. No specific finding was made on the merits of the case as the appeal was withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Gurgaon (the revenue) against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The respondent is M/s Amira Foods (India) Ltd. (the assessee). The assessment year(s) are not explicitly stated. The amount in dispute is Rs. 24,70,738/-. The procedural history involves the revenue filing the present appeal before the High Court.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn in light of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018, dated 11th July, 2018, given the tax effect involved? (Question of procedure/administrative policy) The revenue argued that due to the tax effect being Rs. 24,70,738/-, they have instructions to withdraw the present appeal in accordance with CBDT Circular No. 03/2018. They prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survives therein. The assessee's arguments are not recorded in the judgment.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No. 37 of 2013 (O&M) Decided on : 16.07.2018 Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Gurgaon . . . Appellant(s) Versus M/s Amira Foods (India) Ltd. . . . Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN PRESENT: Mr. Rajesh Sethi, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Arun Biriwal, Advocate and Ms. Pridhi Jaswinder Sandhu, Advocate for the appellant(s). Mr. Rishabh Kapoor, Advocate and Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Advocate for the respondent(s). **** AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (Oral) Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is ` 24,70,738/-, he has instructions to withdraw the present appeal in view of the circular No.03/2018, dated 11th July, 2018, issued by the C.B.D.T., New Delhi. However, he 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 16, 2018 J.Ram (AVNEESH JHINGAN) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No Jawala Ram 2018.07.18 15:54 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →