COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. VARINDER AGRO CHEMICALS
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court decided to dismiss the appeal as withdrawn. The reasoning was based on the appellant-revenue's submission that the tax effect was below the prescribed monetary limit for filing appeals, as per CBDT circulars. The court granted the liberty prayed for by the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal. Since the main appeal was dismissed, any pending Civil Miscellaneous (C.M.) applications were also disposed of. The court did not decide the substantive merits of the case.
What were the facts?
The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Ludhiana-1 (appellant-revenue) against Varinder Agro Chemicals Ltd. (respondent-assessee). The assessment year(s) are not explicitly stated in the provided text. The appeal challenges an order or action by an authority, but the specific nature of that order is not detailed. The amount in dispute is also not specified. The procedural history leading to this High Court appeal is not elaborated beyond the fact that it is an appeal before the High Court.
What were the issues?
The primary issue before the High Court was whether the appeal filed by the revenue should be proceeded with. The appellant-revenue, through its learned counsel, stated that the tax effect involved in the case is below the monetary limit prescribed by Circular No. 3 of 2018 and Circular No. 17 of 2019, read with Letter No. F.No.279/Misc/M-93/2018-ITJ dated 20.08.2019. Based on this, the revenue had instructions to withdraw the appeal. The revenue also sought liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if circumstances warranted it. 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 714 ITA No.531 of 2006 (O&M) Date of decision : 06.09.2019 Commissioner of Income Tax, Ludhiana-1 ...... Appellant versus Varinder Agro Chemicals Ltd. ...... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL Present : Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Senior Standing counsel with Ms. Pridhi Jaswinder Sandhu, Junior Standing counsel for the appellant. Mr. M.S.Kanda, Advocate for the respondent.
AJAY TEWARI, J. (Oral) 1. Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is less than the monetary limit as prescribed in Circular No.3 of 2018 dated 11.07.2018 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, further amended vide Circular No.17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019 read with Letter No.F.No.279/Misc/M-93/2018-ITJ dated 20.08.2019, he has instructions to withdraw the present appeal. However, he prayed that liberty be granted to the appellant-revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal, in case something survives therein. 2. Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. 3. Since the main case has been dismissed, the pending C.M., if any, also stands disposed of. (AJAY TEWARI) JUDGE (HARNARESH SINGH GILL) JUDGE 06.09.2019 anuradha Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No Anuradha 2019.09.11 15:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sh Umang Uniyal vs. Commissioner Department Of Central Goods And Services TaxUttarakhand · 16 Oct 2026
- Shivaraj M S vs. The Union Of INDIAKarnataka · 15 Oct 2026
- Paresh Textiles Prop Paresh Gudhka vs. Superintendent Range Iv Div VBombay · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Palladium Constructions PVT LTD. vs. Principal Commissioner Of Central TaxKarnataka · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Vk Construction vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - IiMadras · 15 Oct 2026
