CIT, LUDHIANA vs. M/S CHAVAN RISHI DEVELOPERS(P) LTD. NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA/736/2010HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01093702201016 October 2019Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI,MR. JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the application for condonation of delay of 301 days in re-filing the appeal. Subsequently, the revenue's counsel stated that due to the tax effect being below the prescribed monetary limit as per CBDT Circulars, they had instructions to withdraw the appeal. The Court then dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, granting the revenue liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survived therein. As the main case was dismissed, any pending application was also disposed of. The specific findings of the ITAT or the substantive issues decided by it are not part of this High Court judgment, as the appeal was withdrawn before any adjudication on merits.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ludhiana against an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The assessee is M/s Chavan Rishi Developers (P) Ltd., New Delhi. The appeal was filed for Assessment Year(s) not specified in the judgment. The revenue sought to withdraw the appeal due to the tax effect being below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018 and Circular No. 17 of 2019, read with a letter dated 20.08.2019. The High Court had previously condoned a delay of 301 days in re-filing the appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the revenue should be dismissed as withdrawn, considering the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limit as per CBDT Circulars? The revenue, through its learned counsel, stated that the tax effect involved in the appeal is less than the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018, as amended by Circular No. 17 of 2019, and further clarified by Letter No. F.No.279/Misc/M-93/2018-ITJ dated 20.08.2019. Consequently, the revenue had instructions to withdraw the present appeal, while praying for liberty to file an application for revival if circumstances warranted. The assessee's contentions are not recorded in the judgment.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

ITA No. 736 of 2010 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No. 736 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: 16.10.2019 Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ludhiana .......Appellant Vs. M/s Chavan Rishi Developers (P) Ltd., New Delhi .......Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL Present: Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Senior Standing Counsel with Ms. Pridhi Jaswinder Sandhu, Junior Standing Counsel for the appellant. Mr. Pankaj Jain, Senior Advocate with Mr. Divya Suri, Advocate for the respondent.

***** AJAY TEWARI

, J. (ORAL)

CM-24668-CII-2010 This is an application for condonation of delay of 301 days in re-filing the present appeal. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed. Delay of 301 days in re-filing the appeal is condoned. ITA-736-2010 (O&M) 1. Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is less than the monetary limit as prescribed in Circular No.3 of 2018 dated 11.07.2018 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, further amended vide Circular No.17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019 read with Letter No. F.No.279/Misc/M-93/2018-ITJ dated 20.08.2019, he has instructions to GURPREET SINGH 2019.10.18 16:20 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh

ITA No. 736 of 2010 (O&M) -2- withdraw the present appeal. However, he prayed that liberty be granted to the appellant-revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal, in case something survives therein. 2. Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. 3. Since the main case has been dismissed, the pending application, if any, also stands disposed of. (AJAY TEWARI) JUDGE (HARNARESH SINGH GILL) October 16, 2019

JUDGE Gurpreet Whether speaking /reasoned : Yes Whether Reportable : No GURPREET SINGH 2019.10.18 16:20 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →