COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) GURGAON vs. GEETA CHAUDHARI

PDF · subscribers
ITA/57/2015HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01110157201518 July 2018Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL,MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

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The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn with liberty granted to the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for.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 left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. Consequently, the application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal was also dismissed as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Gurgaon (appellant-revenue) against Smt. Geeta Chaudhary (respondent-assessee). The appeal challenged an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The tax effect involved in the appeal was ₹12,70,205/-. The appeal was filed before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the revenue should be dismissed as withdrawn in view of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018, dated 11th July, 2018, concerning the monetary limit for filing appeals. Contentions: Assessee: No specific contentions are recorded for the assessee as the appeal was withdrawn by the revenue. Revenue: The learned counsel for the appellant-revenue stated that due to the tax effect being ₹12,70,205/-, they had instructions to withdraw the appeal in accordance with CBDT Circular No. 03/2018. They prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survived.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-57-2015 (O&M) Date of Decision: 18.7.2018 Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Gurgaon ...Appellant. Versus Smt. Geeta Chaudhary ...Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN. PRESENT: Mr. Rajesh Sethi, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Arun Biriwal, Advocate and Ms. Pridhi Jaswinder Sandhu, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Amit Parsad, Advocate for the respondent. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is ` 12,70,205/-, he 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, he 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. 3. As a consequence thereof, CM-3411-CII-15 for condonation of delay in filing the appeal is also dismissed as withdrawn. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE July 18, 2018 (AVNEESH JHINGAN) gbs JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Gurbachan Singh 2018.07.20 11:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →