THE PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL LUDHIANA vs. SMT RADHA AGGARWAL PROP M/S R.P. STEEL INDUSTRIES # 378 SEC 3- C MANDI GOBINDGARH

PDF · subscribers
ITA/457/2017HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01117676201728 September 2018Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL,MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the revenue to withdraw the appeal. The court granted liberty to the revenue 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 legal issue claimed by the revenue was left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. The operative direction was the dismissal of the appeal as withdrawn with liberty granted.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ludhiana (the revenue) against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The respondent is Smt. Radha Aggarwal (the assessee). The appeal was listed for hearing on 10.10.2018 but was preponed to 28.9.2018 at the request of the revenue's counsel. The tax effect involved in the appeal was ₹ 28,37,310/-.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the revenue is permitted to withdraw the appeal in view of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018 dated 11th July, 2018, and if so, whether liberty should be granted to revive the appeal. The revenue's contention was that due to the tax effect being below the threshold stipulated in CBDT Circular No. 03/2018, they had instructions to withdraw the appeal. They also prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if any aspect survived. The judgment records no argument for the respondent-assessee.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-457-2017 (O&M) Date of Decision: 28.9.2018 The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ludhiana ...Appellant. Versus Smt. Radha Aggarwal ...Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN. PRESENT: Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Sr. Standing Counsel for the appellant. None for the respondent. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. At the request of learned counsel for the revenue, the date of hearing in the appeal is preponed from 10.10.2018 to today and the case is taken up for hearing today itself. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is ` 28,37,310/-, 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. 3. 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 September 28, 2018 (AVNEESH JHINGAN) gbs JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No GURBACHAN SINGH 2018.10.04 12:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →