PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 CHD vs. M/S KOTLA HYDRO POWER PVT LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA/398/2015HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01110048201519 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The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn with liberty granted to the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for.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 Tribunal's order on merits. Furthermore, the legal issue claimed by the revenue was left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. The Court did not decide the merits of the case.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Chandigarh (appellant-revenue) against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The respondent is M/s Kotla Hydro Power Pvt. Ltd. The tax effect involved in the appeal was ₹ 26,89,226. The appeal was decided on July 19, 2018, by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn by the revenue in view of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018 dated 11th July, 2018, concerning the monetary limit for filing appeals. Assessee's Contention: Not recorded. Revenue's Contention: The learned counsel for the appellant-revenue stated that due to the tax effect of ₹ 26,89,226, she had instructions to withdraw the present appeal in view of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018. She prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survives therein.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No. 398 of 2015 Decided on : 19.07.2018 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Chandigarh . . . Appellant(s) Versus M/s Kotla Hydro Power Pvt. Ltd. . . . Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN PRESENT: Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Sr. Standing Counsel for the appellant(s). Mr. M.S. Kanda, Advocate for the respondent(s). **** AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (Oral) Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is ` 26,89,226/-, she 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, she 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 19, 2018 J.Ram (AVNEESH JHINGAN) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No Jawala Ram 2018.07.23 17:04 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →