COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX PATIALA vs. MAHARAJA AMARINDER SINGH

PDF · subscribers
ITA/387/2010HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01093315201021 September 2016Bench: MR. JUSTICE M.M. AGGARWAL,MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, granting the liberty prayed for by the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal. 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 Court explicitly stated that the legal issue, as claimed by the revenue, was being left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. This means the substantive merits of the ITAT's decision were not examined or decided by the High Court.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala (appellant-revenue) against Maharaja Amarinder Singh (respondent-assessee). The appeal challenged an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The tax effect involved in the present appeal was approximately ₹22,497/-. The revenue sought to withdraw the appeal in accordance with CBDT Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10.12.2015.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn by the revenue. (Question of procedure) Assessee's Arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the assessee. The assessee was represented by counsel, but their submissions are not detailed. Revenue's Arguments: The revenue, through its learned counsel, stated that due to the low tax effect of approximately ₹22,497/-, it had instructions to withdraw the present appeal in view of CBDT Circular No. 21/2015. The revenue also prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survived therein.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-387-2010 (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 ` 22,497/- (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 15:36 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →