COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ROHTAK vs. M/S TOYO SPRINGS LTD. G.T. ROAD, SONEPAT

PDF · subscribers
ITA/4/2012HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01099403201217 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The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn with liberty granted to the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survives therein. 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 legal issue, as claimed by the revenue, was left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. The Court also ordered the withdrawal of CM-7044-CII-2013 as prayed for by the assessee. The ratio decidendi is that appeals can be withdrawn based on CBDT circulars concerning tax effect, without prejudice to the merits of the case or future adjudication of the legal issue.

What were the facts?

This is an appeal filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Rohtak (the revenue) against M/s Toyo Springs Ltd., Sonepat (the assessee). The appeal challenges an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The tax effect involved in the appeal is ₹ 24,24,388. The revenue sought to withdraw the appeal based on Circular No. 03/2018 dated 11th July 2018, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. The assessee also prayed for the withdrawal of CM-7044-CII-2013.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the revenue should be dismissed as withdrawn in view of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018, given the tax effect involved. The revenue argued that it has instructions to withdraw the appeal in light of the aforementioned circular. The assessee prayed for the withdrawal of CM-7044-CII-2013. No specific arguments were recorded for the assessee regarding the revenue's appeal, other than their prayer for withdrawal of the miscellaneous application.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-4-2012 (O&M) Date of Decision: 17.7.2018 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Rohtak ...Appellant. Versus M/s Toyo Springs Ltd., Sonepat ...Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN. PRESENT: Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Advocate for Mr. Inderpreet Singh, Sr. Standing Counsel for the appellant. Mr. Divya Suri, Advocate and Mr. Sachin Bhardwaj, Advocate for the respondent. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is ` 24,24,388/-, she 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, she 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. 3. Learned counsel for the assessee prays for withdrawal of CM- 7044-CII-2013. 4. Ordered accordingly. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE July 17, 2018 (AVNEESH JHINGAN) gbs JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Gurbachan Singh 2018.07.19 11:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →