CIT vs. M/S SEI MANUFACTURING CO P LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA/621/2010HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01093575201012 February 2020Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI,MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The court granted liberty to the appellant-revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal, should anything survive therein. The reasoning for dismissal was based on the appellant-revenue's submission that the tax effect was below the monetary threshold stipulated in the CBDT circulars, which generally guide the revenue's decision to pursue appeals. The court accepted the withdrawal request and the prayer for liberty to revive. No specific issue regarding the merits of the original assessment or the order under challenge was decided.

What were the facts?

This case involves an appeal filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Ludhiana (appellant-revenue) against M/s S.E.L. Manufacturing Co. (P) Ltd. (respondent). The appeal was filed before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh. The judgment was decided on February 12, 2020. The learned counsel for the appellant-revenue stated that the tax effect involved in the appeal was below the monetary limit prescribed by Circular No. 3 of 2018 and Circular No. 17 of 2019, read with a letter dated August 20, 2019, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. Consequently, the revenue had instructions to withdraw the appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn due to the tax effect being below the prescribed monetary limit for appeals by the revenue? The appellant-revenue argued that the tax effect involved in the appeal was less than the monetary limit prescribed by Circular No. 3 of 2018, as amended by Circular No. 17 of 2019, read with Letter No.F.No.279/Misc/M-93/2018-ITJ dated 20.08.2019. Based on these circulars, the revenue sought to withdraw the appeal. The respondent-assessee was not represented, and no arguments were recorded on their behalf.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No. 621 of 2010 DECIDED ON: FEBRUARY 12, 2020 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I, LUDHIANA APPELLANT VERSUS M/S S.E.L. MANUFACTURING CO. (P) LTD. RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN Present: Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Sr. Standing Counsel with Ms. Pridhi Jaswinder Sandhu, Jr. Standing Counsel, for the appellant. None 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. [AJAY TEWARI] JUDGE [AVNEESH JHINGAN] JUDGE FEBRUARY 12, 2020

sham

1.

Whether speaking/ reasoned : Yes / No 2. Whether reportable : Yes / No SHAM SUNDER 2020.02.13 15:40 I attest to the authenticity and integrity of this document HIGH COURT CHANDIGARH

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →