THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL LUDHIANA vs. SH,INDERJIT SINGH THROUGH SH,RAVNEET SINGH LH #75 OPPOSITE SHUKLA # NAI ABADI KHANNA

PDF · subscribers
ITA/381/2017HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01117593201726 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The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The court granted the revenue liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for. It was 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.

What were the facts?

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ludhiana (the revenue) filed an appeal against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The appeal was filed for the assessment year(s) not specified in the judgment. The amount in dispute was ₹32,494. The procedural history involves the revenue's decision to withdraw the appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the revenue should be permitted to withdraw the appeal. The revenue argued that the tax effect involved was ₹32,494, and in view of Circular No. 03/2018 dated 11th July, 2018, issued by the CBDT, they had instructions to withdraw the appeal. They also prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survived therein. The ITAT's decision on the merits of the case was not recorded as an issue to be decided by the High Court, as the appeal was withdrawn.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-381-2017 (O&M) Date of Decision: 26.7.2018 The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ludhiana ...Appellant. Versus Shri Inderjit Singh ...Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN. PRESENT: Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Sr. Standing Counsel for the appellant. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is ` 32,494/-, 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 26, 2018 (AVNEESH JHINGAN) gbs JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Gurbachan Singh 2018.08.01 12:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →