COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX JALANDHAR II vs. MITHILESH KUMAR
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court held that in view of the CBDT Circular No. 3/2018, the instant appeal is dismissed as not pressed. The Court granted liberty to the Revenue to seek revival of the appeal if circumstances changed, as prayed for by the counsel for the appellant. The question of law was also kept open. The reasoning was based solely on the Revenue's submission regarding the tax effect and the applicability of the CBDT circular, leading to the dismissal of the appeal without a decision on the merits of the substantive issues.
What were the facts?
The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar-II (Revenue) against Mithilesh Kumar (Assessee). The assessment year(s) are not explicitly stated. 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 ₹46,00,047/-. The procedural history is that the Revenue, through its counsel, stated that due to the tax effect being less than ₹50 lakhs, it did not wish to press the appeal on merits, citing Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 issued by the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT).
What were the issues?
1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as not pressed due to the tax effect being below the threshold stipulated in CBDT Circular No. 3/2018? (Question of law, turning on the interpretation and application of CBDT Circular No. 3/2018). Contentions: Assessee: Not recorded. Revenue: The Revenue, through its counsel, stated that the tax effect involved is ₹46,00,047/-, which is less than ₹50 lakhs. In view of CBDT Circular No. 3/2018, the Revenue does not want to press the appeal on merits.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** ITA No.63 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 `46,00,047/- 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 12:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Basudev Logistics, Jagatsinghpur vs. Principal Commissioner, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Prabhudatta Mishra vs. The Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes And Goods And Services Tax, OdishaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Rajesh Kumar Gupta vs. Joint Commissioner Of GST (Appeal), Territorial Range, BolangirOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Attitude Exim PVT. LTD., Rourkela vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S.Pradeep Kumar Mahapatra, Bhubaneswar vs. Superintendent Bhubaneswar-Iii Circle, CGST Range, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
