PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PANCHKULA vs. VIRGO ALUMINUM LTD., SIRMAUR, HP

PDF · subscribers
ITA/75/2023HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01026988202326 September 2025Bench: MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL,MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn. The reasoning was based on the submission by the appellant's counsel that the tax effect involved was under Rs. 2 Crores and that they had specific instructions to withdraw the appeal in view of Circular No. 9 of 2024. The Court accordingly dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. No specific findings were made on the merits of the case as the appeal was withdrawn. The operative direction was to dismiss the appeal. No issues were left undecided, as the appeal was disposed of on procedural grounds.

What were the facts?

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula (the appellant/Revenue) filed an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against an order dated 07.12.2022 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Division Bench ‘B’, Chandigarh. The respondent is Virgo Aluminum Limited. The appeal concerns assessment years not specified in the judgment. The operative part of the judgment indicates that the tax effect involved in the appeal was under Rs. 2 Crores. The appellant's counsel sought to withdraw the appeal based on a circular issued by the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, CBDT.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn in light of the tax effect being below the threshold stipulated in Circular No. 9 of 2024 and the appellant's instructions to withdraw. Assessee's contentions: The respondent (Virgo Aluminum Limited) did not present any arguments as the appeal was withdrawn by the appellant. The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the respondent. Revenue's contentions: The appellant (Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula) submitted that the tax effect involved in the appeal was under Rs. 2 Crores and, in accordance with Circular No. 9 of 2024 dated 17.09.2024 issued by the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, CBDT, Government of India, it had specific instructions to withdraw the appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

217

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

ITA No.75 of 2023 (O&M)

Date of Decision: 26.09.2025

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula

…Appellant

Versus

Virgo Aluminum Limited, District Sirmaur, HP

…Respondent

CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA

Present:- Mr. Rana Gurtej Singh, Junior Standing Counsel

for appellant-Income Tax Department.

Mr. Pankaj Jain, Senior Advocate (joined through VC)

with Mr. Divya Suri, Advocate

Mr. Yogesh Kumar Mittal, Advocate and

Ms. Samridhi Bansal, Advocate for respondent.

***** LISA GILL, J.(Oral) 1.

Present appeal has been filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against order dated 07.12.2022 passed by learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Division Bench ‘B’, Chandigarh, in ITA No.438/CHD/ 2022. 2.

Learned counsel for appellant submits that as the tax effect involved in this appeal is under Rs.2 Crores, he has specific instructions to withdraw this appeal in view of circular No.9 of 2024 dated 17.09.2024 issued by Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, CBDT, Government of India. 3.

Appeal is, accordingly, dismissed as withdrawn. 4.

Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of.

(LISA GILL)

JUDGE

26.09.2025

(MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA) neetu

JUDGE

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No, Whether Reportable: Yes/No NEETU RANI 2025.09.29 12:29 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment PHHC, CHD

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →