COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S BEST FOOD INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD INDRI

PDF · subscribers
ITA/410/2014HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01109564201419 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The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, granting the revenue the liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for.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 ITAT's order on merits. Furthermore, the legal issue claimed by the revenue was explicitly left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. The operative direction was the dismissal of the appeal as withdrawn with liberty.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Gurgaon (the revenue) against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The respondent is M/s Best Food International Pvt. Ltd. The tax effect involved in the appeal was ₹ 23,79,935/-. The appeal was decided on July 19, 2018, by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh.

What were the issues?

The High Court had to decide whether to dismiss the appeal as withdrawn. The revenue, through its learned counsel, stated that it had instructions to withdraw the appeal due to the tax effect being below the threshold stipulated in CBDT Circular No. 03/2018 dated July 11, 2018. The revenue also prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survived therein. No arguments were recorded for the respondent.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No. 410 of 2014 Decided on : 19.07.2018 Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Gurgaon . . . Appellant(s) Versus M/s Best Food International Pvt. Ltd. . . . Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN PRESENT: Mr. Rajesh Sethi, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Arun Biriwal, Advocate for the appellant(s). None for the respondent(s). **** AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (Oral) Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is ` 23,79,935/-, he 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, 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. (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 16:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →