COMMISSIONER OF IT vs. M/S HIGHWAY CYCLE INDS LTD
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The revenue, represented by its counsel, stated that it had instructions to withdraw the appeal due to the tax effect being below the prescribed monetary limits as per CBDT Circulars. The revenue specifically prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal in case something survived therein. The Court granted this liberty. Consequently, any pending Civil Miscellaneous Application (C.M. Application) was also disposed of as the main case was dismissed. No specific issues regarding income tax law were decided on merits.
What were the facts?
The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Ludhiana (appellant-revenue) against M/s. Highway Cycle Industries Limited, Ludhiana (respondent-assessee). The specific assessment year(s) and the order or action under challenge are not explicitly detailed in the provided text. The procedural history is limited to the present appeal being filed before the High Court. The amount in dispute is not stated. The appeal was listed for decision on 29.10.2019.
What were the issues?
The Tribunal did not have to decide any substantive issues of law or fact. The sole matter before the Court was the revenue's request to withdraw the appeal. The revenue's contention was based on the tax effect being below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018 and Circular No. 17 of 2019, read with Letter No. F.No.279/Misc/M-93/2018-ITJ dated 20.08.2019. The revenue sought liberty to revive the appeal if circumstances changed. The assessee's arguments are not recorded as the appeal was withdrawn before any substantive arguments were presented.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
665 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No.429 of 2005 Date of decision : 29.10.2019 The Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Ludhiana ...... Appellant versus M/s. Highway Cycle Industries Limited, Ludhiana. ...... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE ALKA SARIN *** Present : Mr.Chetan Sood, Advocate and Mr.Sandeep Goyal, Advocate for the appellant. Mr.Akshay Bhan, Sr. Advocate with Mr.Alok Mittal, Advocate and Mr.Shantanu, Bansal, Advocate for the respondent. *** 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. 3. Since the main case has been dismissed, the pending C.M. Application, if any, also stands disposed of. (AJAY TEWARI) JUDGE (ALKA SARIN) JUDGE 29.10.2019 raman Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No RAMAN KUMAR 2019.10.31 09:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Utkal Highways, Bidanasi vs. Union Of INDIAOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Pradeep Kumar Behera vs. Superintendent CGST And Central Excise., CuttackOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Manas Behera vs. Commissioner, CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Pramod Kumar Nayak vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, KendraparaOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Nirmal Kumar Sharma S/O Ram Swroop Sharma vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 16 Oct 2026
