COMMISSONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S MAHAVIR SPINNING MILLS LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA/4/2004HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01051558200423 October 2019Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI,MR. JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The reasoning provided is based on the appellant-revenue's submission that the tax effect was below the monetary limit stipulated by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) in its circulars (Circular No. 3 of 2018 and Circular No. 17 of 2019). Consequently, the revenue was granted liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal, should circumstances warrant it. The court also noted that since the main appeal was dismissed, any pending C.M. application, if any, also stood disposed of. The ratio decidendi is that appeals with a low tax effect, as defined by CBDT circulars, can be withdrawn by the revenue, with a possibility of revival under specific conditions. No specific issue was decided on merits.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Ludhiana (appellant-revenue) against M/s Mahavir Spinning Mills Ltd (respondent). The assessment year(s) are not explicitly stated in this excerpt. The appeal challenges an order or action from a lower authority, the details of which are not provided. The procedural history is that the revenue's counsel stated that due to the tax effect being below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018 and Circular No. 17 of 2019, they had instructions to withdraw the appeal. The revenue also requested liberty to revive the appeal if circumstances changed.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn, considering the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limit as per CBDT Circulars. Assessee's contentions: The judgment does not record any contentions from the assessee. The respondent, M/s Mahavir Spinning Mills Ltd, did not present any arguments in this excerpt. Revenue's contentions: The appellant-revenue, through its learned counsel, stated that the tax effect involved in the appeal is less than the monetary limit prescribed in CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018, as amended by Circular No. 17 of 2019 and Letter No. F.No.279/Misc/M-93/2018-ITJ dated 20.08.2019. Based on these circulars, the revenue had instructions to withdraw the present appeal. The revenue 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

ITA No. 4 of 2004 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 523 ITA No. 4 of 2004 (O&M) Date of Decision : 23.10.2019 Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Ludhiana ... Appellant Versus M/s Mahavir Spinning Mills Ltd, Chandigarh Road, Ludhiana

....Respondent CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL Present: Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant. AJAY TEWARI, J.(ORAL) 1. Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is less than the monetary limit as prescribed in Circular No.3 of 2018 dated 11.07.2018 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, further amended vide Circular No.17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019 read with Letter No.F.No.279/Misc/M-93/2018-ITJ dated 20.08.2019, he has instructions to withdraw the present appeal. However, he prayed that liberty be granted to the appellant-revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal, in case something survives therein. 2. Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. POOJA SAINI 2019.10.24 15:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

ITA No. 4 of 2004 (O&M) 2 3. Since the main case has been dismissed, the pending C.M. application, if any, also stands disposed of. ( AJAY TEWARI ) JUDGE ( HARNARESH SINGH GILL ) 23.10.2019 JUDGE pooja saini Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No Whether reportable? Yes/No POOJA SAINI 2019.10.24 15:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →