THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL LUDHIANA vs. M/S SEL TEXTILES LIMITED

PDF · subscribers
ITA/5/2022HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01011022202116 January 2025Bench: MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI,MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that both the appellant (Revenue) and the respondent (Assessee) were ad idem (in agreement) that the tax effect in the present appeal was less than Rs. 2 Crore. In light of this agreement and the prevailing Circulars No.09/2024 dated 17.09.2024 and Circular No.5/2024 dated 15.03.2024, which stipulate conditions for filing and pursuing appeals based on tax effect, the Court ordered that the appeal be disposed of as not pressed. The reasoning is based on the parties' consensus and the administrative instructions issued by the CBDT. The operative direction is that the appeal is disposed of as not pressed, implying no decision on the merits of the case.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ludhiana (the Revenue) against M/s SEL Textiles Limited (the Assessee). The case pertains to the assessment year(s) not specified in the judgment. The order or action under challenge is the appeal itself, filed before the High Court. The amount in dispute, referred to as the tax effect, is stated to be less than Rs. 2 Crore. The procedural history is that the Revenue filed the appeal, and the parties have now agreed to dispose of it based on a tax effect threshold.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue should be disposed of as not pressed in light of the prevailing Circulars of the CBDT regarding tax effect thresholds? (Question of law, turning on the interpretation and application of Circular No.09/2024 dated 17.09.2024 and Circular No.5/2024 dated 15.03.2024). Assessee's Contention: The learned counsel for the respondent (Assessee) is ad idem with the appellant (Revenue) that the tax effect is less than Rs. 2 Crore, and therefore, the appeal should be disposed of as not pressed in accordance with the aforementioned Circulars. Revenue's Contention: The learned counsel for the appellant (Revenue) is ad idem with the respondent (Assessee) that the tax effect in the present appeal is less than Rs. 2 Crore. Consequently, the appeal should be disposed of as not pressed, in the wake of Circular No.09/2024 dated 17.09.2024, read with Circular No.5/2024 dated 15.03.2024.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-5-2022(O&M) Date of decision: 16.01.2025 The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ludhiana … Appellant Versus M/s SEL Textiles Limited … Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA Present: Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Senior Standing Counsel, and Ms. Muskaan Gupta, Advocate, for the appellant. Ms. Radhika Suri, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Abhinav Narang, Advocate, and Ms. Parnika Singla, Advocate, for the respondent. *** ARUN PALLI, J. (Oral) Learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that the tax effect in the present appeal filed by the Revenue is less than Rs.2 Crore. Therefore, in the wake of Circular No.09/2024 dated 17.09.2024, read with Circular No.5/2024 dated 15.03.2024, the appeal be disposed of as not pressed. Ordered accordingly. ( Arun Palli )

Judge 16.01.2025 Rajan ( Sudeepti Sharma ) Judge Whether speaking / reasoned: YES/NO Whether Reportable: YES/NO RAJAN KUMAR 2025.01.17 17:17 I am approving this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →