COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX PATIALA vs. MAHARAJA AMARINDER SINGH
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The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, granting the Revenue the liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for.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 construed as an affirmation of the Tribunal's order on its merits. Furthermore, the legal issue, as claimed by the Revenue, was left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate future case. No specific finding was given on the merits of the case, as the appeal was withdrawn.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, Patiala (Revenue) against Maharaja Amarinder Singh (Assessee). The assessment year(s) are not specified. The appeal challenges an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The tax effect involved in the appeal is approximately ₹1,41,361/-. The Revenue sought to withdraw the appeal in view of CBDT Circular No. 21/2015, dated 10.12.2015, and requested liberty to revive the appeal if circumstances warranted.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn by the Revenue, with liberty to revive. The Revenue argued that due to the low tax effect, it had instructions to withdraw the appeal in accordance with CBDT Circular No. 21/2015. It further prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if any aspect of the matter survived. The Assessee's contentions 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-374-2010 (O&M) Date of decision:- 21.09.2016 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala ...Appellant Versus Maharaja Amarinder Singh ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.J. VAZIFDAR, CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL Present:- Mr. Zora Singh Klar, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. Akshay Bhan, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Alok Mittal, Advocate, and Mr. Amandeep Singh Talwar, Advocate, for the respondent. * * * * S.J. VAZIFDAR, C.J. (ORAL) Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is ` 1,41,361/- (approx.), he has instructions to withdraw the present appeal in view of the circular No. 21/2015 dated 10.12.2015 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. (S.J. VAZIFDAR) CHIEF JUSTICE (DEEPAK SIBAL) JUDGE 21.09.2016 Amodh Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No Amodh Sharma 2016.09.21 15:35 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Abdhish Dhal Samanta, Bhubaneswar vs. Chief Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Kniit Net Industries Private Limited, Khurda vs. Superintendent Of CGST And Central Excise, Bhubaneswar Ii CircleOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Swarnapai Chemicals (Opc) Private Limited, Cuttack vs. Sales Tax Officer, Cuttack IOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S. Middlex, Puri vs. Commnr. Of State Tax, Banijyakar Bhawan, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Sunadei Indane Gramin Vitrak, Nayagarh vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, Cuttack, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
