PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -2 CHANDIGARH vs. M/S KARAN EMPIRE PVT LTD H.N 123 PHASE-3B1 MOHALI
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn with liberty granted to the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for. The Court 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 explicitly left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate future case. No decision was made on the substantive merits of the appeal.
What were the facts?
The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Chandigarh (appellant-revenue) filed an appeal against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The respondent is M/s Karan Empire Pvt. Ltd., Mohali. The appeal was filed for the assessment year(s) not specified in the judgment. The tax effect involved in the appeal was ₹34,37,522/-. The revenue sought to withdraw the appeal based on a CBDT Circular.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn by the revenue. (Question of procedure) Contentions: Assessee: No specific contentions recorded for the assessee. Revenue: The revenue, through its learned counsel, stated that due to the tax effect of ₹34,37,522/-, it had instructions to withdraw the appeal in view of Circular No. 03/2018 dated 11th July, 2018, issued by the CBDT. The revenue also prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survived therein.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-490-2017 (O&M) Date of Decision: 31.10.2018 The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Chandigarh ...Appellant. Versus M/s Karan Empire Pvt. Ltd., Mohali ...Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL. PRESENT: Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Sr. Standing Counsel for the appellant. Mr. Vishal Gupta, Advocate for the respondent. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is ` 34,37,522/-, she 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, she has prayed that liberty be granted 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 October 31, 2018 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) gbs JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No GURBACHAN SINGH 2018.11.02 16:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Basudev Logistics, Jagatsinghpur vs. Principal Commissioner, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Prabhudatta Mishra vs. The Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes And Goods And Services Tax, OdishaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Rajesh Kumar Gupta vs. Joint Commissioner Of GST (Appeal), Territorial Range, BolangirOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Attitude Exim PVT. LTD., Rourkela vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S.Pradeep Kumar Mahapatra, Bhubaneswar vs. Superintendent Bhubaneswar-Iii Circle, CGST Range, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
