COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LDH vs. M/S HIGHWAY CYCLE IND

PDF · subscribers
ITA/5/2002HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01051557200223 August 20161 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, granting liberty to the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for.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 Tribunal's order on merits. Furthermore, the legal issue claimed by the revenue was left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. The specific findings or reasoning of the ITAT order under challenge were not discussed or decided upon by the High Court.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ludhiana (the appellant-revenue) against M/s Highway Cycle Industries Ltd., Ludhiana (the respondent-assessee). The appeal was against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The tax effect involved in the appeal was Rs. 3,30,000/-. The appeal was decided on 23.08.2016.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the revenue should be withdrawn in view of CBDT Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10.12.2015, considering the tax effect involved. The revenue argued that due to the tax effect of Rs. 3,30,000/-, it had instructions to withdraw the appeal in accordance with CBDT Circular No. 21/2015. The revenue also prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survived therein. The judgment does not record any arguments from the respondent-assessee.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Sr. No. 415 (2) ITA-5-2002

Decided on : 23.08.2016 Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ludhiana ..... Appellant

VERSUS M/s Highway Cycle Industries Ltd., Ludhiana ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.J. VAZIFDAR, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL Present: Mr.Zora Singh Klar, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr.Akshay Bhan, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Alok Mittal, Advocate, for the respondent.

******* S.J. VAZIFDAR, C.J. (Oral) Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is Rs.3,30,000/-, he has instructions to withdraw the present appeal in view of the circular No.21/2015, dated 10.12.2015, issued by the C.B.D.T., New Delhi. However, he 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.

[ S.J. VAZIFDAR ]

CHIEF JUSTICE 23.08.2016

[ DEEPAK SIBAL ] shamsher JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No Shamsher Singh 2016.08.24 17:37 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →