PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX HISSAR vs. M/S MARVEL TEA ESTATE INDIA LTD
What did the High Court hold?
The Tribunal decided to dismiss the appeal as not pressed. The reasoning was based on the Revenue's submission that the tax effect was below the threshold stipulated in CBDT Circular No. 3/2018, which advised against pursuing appeals with a low tax effect. The ratio decidendi is that appeals with a tax effect below the prescribed limit, as per CBDT circulars, may be withdrawn or not pressed by the Revenue. The operative direction was to dismiss the appeal. Liberty was granted to the Revenue to seek revival of the appeal if circumstances changed, and the question of law was kept open.
What were the facts?
The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Hissar (Revenue) against M/s Marvel Tea Estate (India) Ltd., Hissar (Assessee). The assessment year(s) are not explicitly stated. The appeal challenges an order or action by an authority, but the specific authority and the nature of the order are not detailed. The tax effect involved in the case is Rs. 5,38,125/-. The procedural history relevant is that the Revenue, citing a CBDT Circular, decided not to press the appeal on merits.
What were the issues?
The Tribunal had to decide whether to proceed with the appeal on its merits. The Revenue argued that the tax effect involved is Rs. 5,38,125/-, which is less than Rs. 50 lacs. In view of Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 issued by the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Direct Taxes, the Revenue stated it did not want to press the appeal on merits. The judgment does not record any arguments from the Assessee's side regarding this specific point.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** ITA-453-2015 (O&M) Date of Decision: 03.10.2018 **** Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Hissar
...Appellant
VS.
M/s Marvel Tea Estate (India) Ltd., Hissar ... Respondent **** Coram : Hon’ble Mr.Justice Surya Kant
Hon’ble Mr.Justice Sudip Ahluwalia **** Present: Mr. Yogesh Putney, Advocate for the appellant
Mr. Akshay Bhan, Senior Advocate with Mr. Alok Mittal, Advocate for the respondent **** SURYA KANT J. (Oral)
(1) Learned counsel for Revenue states that the tax effect involved in this case is `5,38,125/- and in view of the recent Circular No.3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 issued by the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board Direct Taxes, the tax effect being less than `50 lacs, he does not want to press this appeal on merits. (2) In view of the CBDT Circular, the instant appeal is dismissed as not pressed. As prayed for by learned counsel for the appellant, liberty is granted to the Revenue to seek revival of the appeal, if need be, in the changed circumstances. The question of law is also kept open.
(Surya Kant) Judge
03.10.2018 vishal shonkar (Sudip Ahluwalia) Judge
Whether speaking/reasoned?
Yes 2. Whether reportable?
No V VISHAL 2018.10.06 12:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Mishka Steels LLP And Anr. vs. The Superintendent Of Central Goods And Service Tax, Cx, Range-Ii, Behala Div. And Ors.Calcutta · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Gujarat Co-Operative Milk Marketing Federation Limited vs. Union Of INDIAGujarat · 14 Oct 2026
- Ramesh K Devadiga vs. Khernagar Nandadeep Co Operative Housing Society LTDBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- Ramesh K Devadiga And Ors vs. Khernagar Nandadeep Co-Operative Housing Society LTD And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- Permender Singh vs. Union Of INDIA And Ors.Calcutta · 14 Oct 2026
