PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3 LUDHIANA vs. M/S NIKKAMAL JEWELLERS

PDF · subscribers
ITA/60/2016HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01110654201626 September 2018Bench: MS. JUSTICE NAVITA SINGH,MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR VERMA1 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that in view of CBDT Circular No. 3/2018, 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 reasoning was solely based on the Revenue's submission that the tax effect was below the threshold specified in the circular, making it unnecessary to adjudicate the merits of the appeal. The ratio decidendi is that appeals with a tax effect below the prescribed limit in a CBDT circular can be dismissed as not pressed, with liberty to seek revival.

What were the facts?

This is an appeal filed by the Revenue, the Pre. Commissioner of Income Tax-3, Ludhiana, against M/s Nikkamal Jewellers, Ludhiana. The appeal pertains to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) proceedings. The Revenue's counsel stated that the tax effect involved in the case is ₹44,16,573/-. In light of a recent Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 issued by the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board Direct Taxes (CBDT), which sets a threshold for tax effect below which appeals are not to be pressed, the Revenue indicated its intention not to press the appeal on merits.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as not pressed in view of the tax effect being below the threshold stipulated in CBDT Circular No. 3/2018? (Question of law) The Revenue argued that the tax effect of ₹44,16,573/- is less than ₹50 lacs, and therefore, in accordance with CBDT Circular No. 3/2018, the appeal should not be pressed on merits. The Revenue relied on the said circular. The Assessee did not present any arguments as the Revenue indicated it would not press the appeal.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** ITA No.60 of 2016 Date of Decision: 26.09.2018 **** The Pre. Commissioner of Income Tax-3, Ludhiana ..... Appellant Versus M/s Nikkamal Jewellers, Ludhiana

..... Respondent CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SUDIP AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. Akshay Bhan, Senior 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 `44,16,573/- 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 26.09.2018

(SUDIP AHLUWALIA) Bhumika JUDGE 1. Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes 2. Whether reportable: No Bhumika Bhati 2018.09.28 13:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →