CIT BATHINDA vs. RIKHI RAM

PDF · subscribers
ITA/425/2010HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01093357201024 October 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The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn with liberty to the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for.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 ITAT's order on merits. Furthermore, the legal issue claimed by the revenue was left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. No specific finding was given on the merits of the case as the appeal was withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The Commissioner of Income Tax, Bathinda (the appellant-revenue) filed an appeal before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The respondent was Rikhi Ram. The appeal was filed in the year 2010. The present proceedings relate to a Civil Miscellaneous application and the main appeal. The revenue sought to withdraw the appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal can be withdrawn by the revenue in view of the CBDT Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10.12.2015, due to the tax effect being below ₹20 lacs? The revenue argued that the appeal should be withdrawn as the tax effect involved was below ₹20 lacs, citing CBDT Circular No. 21/2015. The revenue also prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survives therein. The judgment does not record any arguments from the respondent.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CM-21656-CII-2016 in/and ITA-425-2010 Date of decision:- 24.10.2016

The Commissioner of Income Tax, Bathinda

...Applicant-Appellant Versus

Rikhi Ram ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.J. VAZIFDAR, CHIEF JUSTICE

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DARSHAN SINGH

Present:- Mr. C.S. Singh, Advocate,

for the applicant-appellant.

Mr. Alok Mittal, Advocate,

for the respondent. * * * * S.J. VAZIFDAR, C.J. (ORAL)

Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is below ` 20 lacs, 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

(DARSHAN SINGH) JUDGE 24.10.2016 Amodh Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No

Amodh Sharma 2016.10.24 11:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →