PR . COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL),GURGAON vs. SH. VIJAY KUMAR SOOD

PDF · subscribers
ITA/442/2017HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01117660201719 July 2018Bench: MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA,LOK ADALAT BENCH - 31 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The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, granting the revenue the liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for.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 Tribunal's order on merits. Furthermore, the legal issue, as claimed by the revenue, was left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate future case. No specific finding was made on the merits of the case.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Gurgaon (the revenue) against Shri Vijay Kumar Sood (the assessee). The assessment year(s) are not specified. The order under challenge is the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The procedural history involves the revenue's decision to withdraw the appeal due to a tax effect of ₹86,211, in accordance with CBDT Circular No. 03/2018 dated 11th July, 2018. The revenue sought liberty to revive the appeal if circumstances warranted.

What were the issues?

The Tribunal had to decide whether to dismiss the appeal as withdrawn. The revenue argued that due to the low tax effect (₹86,211), it had instructions to withdraw the appeal in line with CBDT Circular No. 03/2018. The revenue also prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal. The judgment does not record any arguments from the assessee's side.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-442-2017 Date of Decision: 19.7.2018 Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Gurgaon ...Appellant. Versus Shri Vijay Kumar Sood ...Respondent. 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. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is ` 86,211/-, he 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, he 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. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE July 19, 2018 (AVNEESH JHINGAN) gbs JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Gurbachan Singh 2018.07.20 11:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →