COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II vs. CHEEMA BOILERS LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA/678/2009HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01084811200926 July 2018Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL,MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. It granted the liberty to the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for. The Court clarified that the withdrawal of the appeal by the revenue would not be construed as an affirmation of the Tribunal's order on merits. Furthermore, the legal issue claimed by the revenue was explicitly left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate future case. The court did not decide the merits of the case.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Chandigarh (the revenue) against M/s Cheema Boilers Ltd., Mohali (the assessee). The appeal challenged an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The tax effect involved in the appeal was ₹43,16,724. The revenue sought to withdraw the appeal based on Circular No. 03/2018 dated 11th July 2018 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. The revenue also requested liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survived therein.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the revenue is permitted to withdraw the appeal given the tax effect and CBDT Circular No. 03/2018? (Question of procedure/administrative policy) Contentions: Assessee: No specific contentions recorded in the judgment. Revenue: The revenue, through its learned counsel, stated that due to the tax effect of ₹43,16,724, it had instructions to withdraw the appeal in view of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018. The revenue prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if circumstances warranted.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-678-2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: 26.7.2018 Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Chandigarh ...Appellant. Versus M/s Cheema Boilers Ltd., Mohali ...Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN. PRESENT: Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Sr. Standing Counsel for the appellant. Mr. B.M. Monga, Advocate and Mr. Rohit Kaura, Advocate for the respondent. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is ` 43,16,724/-, she has instructions to withdraw the present appeal in view of Circular No.03/2018, dated 11th July, 2018, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, New Delhi. However, she has prayed that liberty be granted to the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal in case something survives therein. 2. Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. It is, however, clarified that withdrawal of the appeal by the revenue shall not be taken to be affirmation of order of the Tribunal on merits. Further, the legal issue as claimed by the revenue is being left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE July 26, 2018 (AVNEESH JHINGAN) gbs JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Gurbachan Singh 2018.08.01 12:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →