COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S VARINDRA AGRO CHEMICALS

PDF · subscribers
ITA/61/2001HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01042106200126 September 2018Bench: MS. JUSTICE NAVITA SINGH,MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR VERMA1 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court decided that the appeal should be dismissed as not pressed. The reasoning was based on the Revenue's submission that the tax effect of ₹7,71,941/- was below the threshold stipulated in CBDT Circular No. 3/2018. Consequently, the Revenue stated it did not wish to press the appeal on merits. The Court granted liberty to the Revenue to seek revival of the appeal if circumstances changed. The question of law was also kept open. No specific finding was made on the merits of the original dispute.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ludhiana (Revenue) against M/s Varindra Agro Chemicals Ltd., Ludhiana (Assessee). The assessment year(s) are not specified. The appeal challenges an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), though the specific order or action is not detailed. The tax effect involved in the case is stated to be ₹7,71,941/-. The procedural history is limited to the filing of this 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 pressed on merits. The Revenue's contention was based on the tax effect involved. The Revenue argued that in view of 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 monetary limit for filing appeals, the appeal should not be pressed as the tax effect is less than ₹50 lacs. The Assessee's arguments are not recorded as the Revenue did not press the appeal.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** ITA No.61 of 2001 Date of Decision: 26.09.2018 **** Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ludhiana ..... Appellant Versus M/s Varindra Agro Chemicals Ltd., 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 `7,71,941/- 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 →