PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX FARIDABAD vs. CINEPOLIS INDIA P LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA/48/2025HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01070304202526 August 2025Bench: MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL,MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted that the learned counsel for the appellant had instructions to withdraw the appeal. The withdrawal was sought due to a jurisdictional issue, as the order being challenged was passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Mumbai, and not by the ITAT as initially stated. The Court allowed the withdrawal of the appeal. The judgment explicitly stated that there was no expression of opinion on the merits of the matter or the aspect of delay in filing/re-filing the appeal. The appellant was granted liberty to avail the remedy available in accordance with law before the correct jurisdictional Court. Pending applications were also disposed of.

What were the facts?

The appellant, Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad, filed an appeal challenging an order dated August 30, 2023, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'F', New Delhi. The appeal was filed with a delay of 330 days in re-filing and 3 days in filing. The appellant's counsel submitted that the order being challenged was actually passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Mumbai on January 30, 2018. Due to this jurisdictional issue, the appellant sought permission to withdraw the appeal to pursue the matter before the correct jurisdictional court.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the appellant is maintainable before this Court, considering the jurisdictional challenge raised regarding the order under appeal. The appellant argued that the appeal was filed against an order of the ITAT, but upon review, it was discovered that the order being challenged was passed by the CIT(A)-4, Mumbai. Therefore, the present appeal before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh was not maintainable due to incorrect jurisdiction. The appellant sought liberty to withdraw the appeal to approach the appropriate forum. The revenue did not record any arguments in the judgment.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

118

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

CM-8976-78-CII-2025 in/and

ITA-48-2025

Date of Decision: August 26, 2025

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX FARIDABAD

.....Appellant

Versus

CINEPOLIS INDIA PVT. LTD.

..... Respondent

CORAM:- HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA

Present: Mr. Varun Issar, Advocate for the appellant.

**** LISA GILL, J. 1.

Learned counsel for appellant, at this stage, submits that he has instructions to withdraw this appeal filed with delay of 330 days in re-filing and 3 days in filing thereof for challenging order dated 30.08.2023 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench “F”, New Delhi as order dated 30.01.2018 has been passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Mumbai while seeking liberty to avail the remedy available in accordance with law before the correct jurisdictional Court.

RITU SHARMA 2025.08.29 13:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CM-8976-78-CII-2025 in/and ITA-48-2025

-2-

Appeal is, accordingly, dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as aforesaid. It is clarified that there is no expression of opinion on the merits of matter or the aspect of delay in filing/re-filing this appeal. 3.

Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of.

(LISA GILL)

JUDGE

(MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA) August 26, 2025

JUDGE Rts

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No

RITU SHARMA 2025.08.29 13:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →