COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX JALANDHAR II vs. MITHILESH KUMAR

PDF · subscribers

ITA/60/2013HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01105271201303 October 2018Bench: MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT,MR. JUSTICE SUDIP AHLUWALIA1 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that in view of CBDT Circular No. 3/2018, which specifies a monetary limit for filing appeals, and considering the tax effect of ₹42,36,967 in this case, the appeal is dismissed as not pressed. The Court granted liberty to the Revenue to seek revival of the appeal if circumstances change. The question of law was also kept open. The operative direction is the dismissal of the appeal.

What were the facts?

This is an appeal filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar-II (Revenue) against an order concerning Mithilesh Kumar (Assessee). The appeal pertains to an assessment year not explicitly stated in the judgment. The Revenue stated that the tax effect involved in the case is ₹42,36,967. The Revenue's counsel informed the High Court that, in light of Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 issued by the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board Direct Taxes, they did not wish to press the appeal on merits as the tax effect was less than ₹50 lacs.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as not pressed in light of the tax effect and CBDT Circular No. 3/2018? (Question of law) The Revenue argued that the tax effect of ₹42,36,967 is below the threshold of ₹50 lacs stipulated in CBDT Circular No. 3/2018, and therefore, they do not wish to press the appeal on merits. The Assessee's contentions are not recorded in the judgment.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** ITA No.60 of 2013 (O&M) Date of Decision: 03.10.2018 **** Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar-II

...Appellant

VS.

Mithilesh Kumar

... Respondent **** Coram : Hon’ble Mr.Justice Surya Kant

Hon’ble Mr.Justice Sudip Ahluwalia **** Present: Mr. Vivek Sethi, Advocate for the appellant

Mr. Akshay Bhan, Sr.Advocate with

Mr. Alok Mittal, Advocate for the respondent **** SURYA KANT J. (Oral)

(1) Learned counsel for Revenue states that the tax effect involved in this case is `42,36,967/- and in view of the recent Circular No.3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 issued by the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board Direct Taxes, the tax effect being less than `50 lacs, he does not want to press this appeal on merits. (2) In view of the CBDT Circular, the instant appeal is dismissed as not pressed. As prayed for by learned counsel for the appellant, liberty is granted to the Revenue to seek revival of the appeal, if need be, in the changed circumstances. The question of law is also kept open.

(Surya Kant) Judge

03.10.2018 vishal shonkar (Sudip Ahluwalia) Judge

Whether speaking/reasoned?

Yes/No 2. Whether reportable?

Yes/No V VISHAL 2018.10.06 13:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →