PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PANCHKULA vs. M/S ADMAC FORMULATIONS

PDF · subscribers
ITA/71/2018HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01119402201831 July 2018Bench: MR. JUSTICE R.C. KATHURIA (RETD.),MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, granting the revenue liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for.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 considered 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 case. The judgment does not record any specific findings on the merits of the case or the reasoning of the Tribunal below, as the appeal was disposed of on a procedural ground.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula (the revenue) against M/s ADMAC Formulations, Panchkula (the assessee). The appeal was filed before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh. The tax effect involved in the appeal was ₹42,33,598. 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 Whether the appeal filed by the revenue should be dismissed as withdrawn in view of the tax effect and CBDT Circular No. 03/2018? (Question of law) Assessee's Contention: Not recorded. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, through its learned counsel, stated that due to the tax effect of ₹42,33,598, it had instructions to withdraw the appeal in accordance with CBDT Circular No. 03/2018. The revenue also prayed for liberty to revive the appeal if any aspect survived.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-71-2018 (O&M) Date of Decision: 31.7.2018 Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula ...Appellant. Versus M/s ADMAC Formulations, Panchkula ...Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN. PRESENT: Mr. Yogesh Putney, Sr. Standing Counsel for the appellant. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is ` 42,33,598/-, he 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, he 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 31, 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 →