CIT, PANCHKULA vs. MOHINDER KUMAR
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court held that in view of CBDT Circular No. 3/2018, which provides for a monetary limit for filing appeals, and considering that the tax effect in the present case (₹12,56,600/-) was below the threshold of ₹50 lacs, the Revenue did not want to press the appeal on merits. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the instant appeal as not pressed. Liberty was granted to the Revenue to seek revival of the appeal if circumstances changed. The question of law was also kept open. The ratio decidendi is that appeals with a tax effect below the threshold specified in CBDT circulars may be dismissed as not pressed, without prejudice to the Revenue's right to seek revival under changed circumstances.
What were the facts?
The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Panchkula (Revenue) against Mohinder Kumar (assessee) for the assessment year(s) not specified in the judgment. The appeal challenges an order or action passed by an authority below the High Court, the specifics of which are not detailed. The tax effect involved in the case is stated to be ₹12,56,600/-. The procedural history is that the Revenue, citing a recent Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 issued by the CBDT, decided not to press the appeal on merits due to the tax effect being less than ₹50 lacs.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue should be dismissed as not pressed, given the tax effect and the CBDT Circular No. 3/2018? (Question of law) Assessee's Contentions: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the assessee. However, the assessee's counsel was present and the appeal was dismissed as prayed for by the appellant's counsel. Revenue's Contentions: The Revenue argued that the tax effect in the present case is ₹12,56,600/-. In view of CBDT Circular No. 3/2018, which stipulates a monetary limit for filing appeals, and since the tax effect is less than ₹50 lacs, the Revenue did not wish 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.718 of 2008 (O&M) Date of Decision: 13.09.2018 **** Commissioner of Income-tax, Panchkula
...Appellant
VS.
Mohinder Kumar
... Respondent **** Coram : Hon’ble Mr.Justice Surya Kant
Hon’ble Mr.Justice Sudip Ahluwalia **** Present: Mr. Yogesh Putney, Advocate for the appellant
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 `12,56,600/- 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, a photocopy whereof is taken on record and is marked as Mark ‘A’, 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
13.09.2018 vishal shonkar (Sudip Ahluwalia) Judge
Whether speaking/reasoned?
Yes 2. Whether reportable?
No V.Vishal 2018.09.17 16:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S.Sidhivinayak Roadways, Sundergarh vs. Commissioner Of GST And Central Excise, Rourkela Commissionerate, RourkelaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Dillip Kumar Behera vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Mayurbhanj CircleOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Kalinga Paper Mart, Sundergarh vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Kabita Nayak vs. Chief Commissioner, CGST, Central Excise And Customs, KhurdaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Swastika Ingot PVT.LTD, Sundargarh vs. The Addl Commissioner, GST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
