THE COMMR. OF INCOME TAX-III LDH. vs. AVINASH GUPTA

PDF · subscribers
ITA/467/2006HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01075192200618 January 2017Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL,MR. JUSTICE RAMENDRA JAIN1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the appeal to be dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty as prayed for by the revenue. It was clarified that the withdrawal of the appeal by the revenue would not be construed as an affirmation of the ITAT's order on its 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. The operative direction was the dismissal of the appeal as withdrawn with liberty to revive.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax-III, Ludhiana (appellant-revenue) against Sh. Avinash Gupta (respondent-assessee). The assessment year(s) are not specified. The appeal challenges an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The material fact that emerged during the hearing was that the tax effect involved in the appeal was less than ₹20 lakh. This was brought to the court's attention by the learned counsel for the appellant.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal can be withdrawn by the revenue with liberty to file an application for revival in case something survives therein, given that the tax effect is less than ₹20 lakh and in view of CBDT Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10.12.2015. The appellant-revenue, through its counsel, conceded that the tax effect involved was less than ₹20 lakh. In light of CBDT Circular No. 21/2015, the appellant prayed for permission to withdraw the appeal with liberty to revive it if circumstances warranted. The respondent-assessee's contentions are not recorded in the judgment.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No.467 of 2006 Date of decision: 18.01.2017 Commissioner of Income Tax-III, Ludhiana ....Appellant Versus Sh. Avinash Gupta ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMENDRA JAIN

Present: - Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. Rajiv Sharma, Advocate, for the respondent. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (ORAL) Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue could not dispute that the tax effect involved is less than ` 20 lakh. In view of circular No.21/2015 dated 10.12.2015 issued by the C.B.D.T., New Delhi, learned counsel for the appellant prays that he may be allowed to withdraw this appeal with liberty 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 (RAMENDRA JAIN) January 18, 2017 JUDGE R.S. Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Ravinder Singh 2017.01.19 10:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →