PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX PATIALA vs. STATE BANK OF PATIALA THE MALL PATIALA

PDF · subscribers
ITA/451/2015HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01110108201521 January 2025Bench: MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI,MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court ordered accordingly, meaning the appeal was disposed of as not pressed. The primary reason for this decision was the submission by the respondent-Bank, supported by the Revenue, that the appeal did not survive for adjudication due to the tax effect being below the threshold stipulated in CBDT Circular No. 5 of 2024. The Court accepted the submission that the appeal be disposed of as not pressed. The ratio of the decision is that appeals with a tax effect below the threshold specified in relevant CBDT circulars are to be treated as not pressed and disposed of accordingly, unless specific circumstances warrant otherwise. The operative direction was to dispose of the appeal as not pressed.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, Patiala (the appellant/Revenue) against the State Bank of Patiala (the respondent/assessee). The assessment year(s) are not specified. The order or action under challenge is the appeal itself. The procedural history is that the appeal was listed for hearing before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. The tax effect in the appeal was stated to be less than Rs. 2 crores, as per CBDT Circular No. 5 of 2024.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal survives for adjudication given the tax effect being less than Rs. 2 crores as per CBDT Circular No. 5 of 2024? (Question of law) Assessee's Contention: The respondent-Bank, through its learned Senior counsel, submitted that in terms of CBDT Circular No. 5 of 2024, dated September 17, 2024, the appeal does not survive for adjudication as the tax effect is less than Rs. 2 crores. Revenue's Contention: The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant fairly submitted that the appeal be disposed of as not pressed, acknowledging the position stated by the respondent. The Revenue also stated that if any cause of action, dispute, or interest still survives, they would move an appropriate application for restoration and decision on merits.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-451-2015(O&M) Date of decision: 21.01.2025 The Pr. Commissioner of Income-tax, Patiala … Appellant Versus State Bank of Patiala … Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA Present: Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Senior Standing Counsel, and Ms. Muskaan Gupta, Advocate, for the appellant-Income Tax Dept. Mr. Sanjay Bansal, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Gurdeep Singh, Advocate, for the respondent-Bank. *** ARUN PALLI, J. (Oral) Learned Senior counsel for the respondent-Bank submits, for in terms of circular No.5 of 2024, dated September 17, 2024, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, the tax effect in the present appeal being less than Rs.2 crores, the same does not survive for adjudication. The above position is not disputed by learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant. And, as always, he fairly submits that the appeal be disposed of as not pressed. However, in case any cause of action, dispute or interest still survives, the appellant would move appropriate application for its restoration and decision on merits. Ordered accordingly. ( Arun Palli )

Judge 21.01.2025 Rajan ( Sudeepti Sharma ) Judge Whether speaking / reasoned: YES/NO Whether Reportable: YES/NO RAJAN KUMAR 2025.01.23 11:01 I am approving this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →