PR . COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL),GURGAON vs. SH. VIJAY KUMAR SOOD
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The court granted the revenue liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for. It was 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 court explicitly stated that the legal issue, as claimed by the revenue, was being left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate future case. No specific findings were made on the merits of the ITAT's order.
What were the facts?
The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Gurgaon (the revenue) against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The respondent is Shri Vijay Kumar Sood (the assessee). The appeal pertains to an assessment year not specified in the judgment. The revenue sought to withdraw the appeal due to a tax effect of ₹8,74,500, in accordance with CBDT Circular No. 03/2018 dated 11th July, 2018. The revenue requested liberty to revive the appeal if circumstances warranted.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the revenue is permitted to withdraw the appeal based on the tax effect and CBDT Circular No. 03/2018, while seeking liberty to revive it. Assessee's contentions: Not recorded in the judgment. Revenue's contentions: The revenue, through its counsel, stated that the tax effect involved was ₹8,74,500. Based on this, and in view of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018 dated 11th July, 2018, the revenue had instructions to withdraw the present appeal. The revenue prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survived therein.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-444-2017 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 ` 8,74,500/-, 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 →- M/S Abdhish Dhal Samanta, Bhubaneswar vs. Chief Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Kniit Net Industries Private Limited, Khurda vs. Superintendent Of CGST And Central Excise, Bhubaneswar Ii CircleOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Swarnapai Chemicals (Opc) Private Limited, Cuttack vs. Sales Tax Officer, Cuttack IOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S. Middlex, Puri vs. Commnr. Of State Tax, Banijyakar Bhawan, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Sunadei Indane Gramin Vitrak, Nayagarh vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, Cuttack, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
