COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX JALANDHAR II vs. JEETU KESHI
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court decided to dismiss the appeal as not pressed. The reasoning was based on the submission by the Revenue's counsel, who invoked CBDT Circular No. 3/2018. This circular provides guidelines on the monetary limits for filing appeals, and the tax effect in this case (₹4,51,447/-) fell below the specified threshold of ₹50 lacs. Consequently, the Revenue chose not to pursue the appeal on its merits. The Court granted the Revenue liberty to seek revival of the appeal if circumstances changed, and importantly, kept the question of law open for future consideration. No decision was made on the substantive merits of the ITAT's order.
What were the facts?
The Revenue, Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar-II, filed an appeal before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh against an order concerning the assessee, Jeetu Keshi. The assessment year(s) are not explicitly stated. The appeal challenges a decision of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The tax effect involved in the case is ₹4,51,447/-. The Revenue's counsel stated that due to the tax effect being less than ₹50 lacs, they did not wish to press the appeal on merits, referencing 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?
The primary issue before the High Court was whether the appeal filed by the Revenue should be pressed on merits, given the tax effect and the CBDT Circular. The Revenue argued that in view of Circular No. 3/2018, which sets a monetary limit for filing appeals, and the tax effect of ₹4,51,447/- being below ₹50 lacs, they did not want to press the appeal on merits. The judgment does not record any specific arguments from the assessee's side regarding the merits of the case, but rather notes their prayer for liberty to seek revival of the appeal if circumstances change. The question of law was kept open.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** ITA No.65 of 2013 (O&M) Date of Decision: 03.10.2018 **** Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar-II
...Appellant
VS.
Jeetu Keshi
... 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 `4,51,447/- 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 →- U Days Garments vs. The Adjudication OfficerMadras · 16 Oct 2026
- M/S Jsw Cement Limited,Jajpur vs. State Of OdishaOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sreeshobi Enterprises vs. The Appellate AuthorityMadras · 16 Oct 2026
- S.T.Promotors vs. The Commercial Tax OfficerMadras · 16 Oct 2026
- Prashanti Das (M/S. Panchamukhi Enterprises) vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Jagatsinghpur CircleOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
