COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I, CHD. vs. RANBIR SINGH AND ANR. LR OF AVTAR SINGH

PDF · subscribers
ITA/78/2010HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01093749201011 August 2016Bench: MR. JUSTICE M.M. AGGARWAL,MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn with liberty granted to the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal. It was clarified that the withdrawal of the appeal by the revenue would not be considered an affirmation of the ITAT's order on merits. The court also stated that the legal issue claimed by the revenue was being left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. The judgment did not delve into the merits of the case or the specific grounds of appeal.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Chandigarh (appellant-revenue) against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The respondents were Ranbir Singh and another, the legal heirs of Avtar Singh. The tax effect involved in the appeal was approximately ₹17,20,687/-. The appeal was filed before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the revenue should be dismissed as withdrawn in view of CBDT Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10.12.2015, given the tax effect involved? The revenue, through its learned counsel, stated that it had instructions to withdraw the appeal due to the tax effect being approximately ₹17,20,687/-, in accordance with CBDT Circular No. 21/2015. The revenue also prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survived therein. The respondents were represented by their senior counsel and other advocates.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-78-2010 (O&M) Date of decision:- 11.08.2016 Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Chandigarh. ...Appellant Versus Ranbir Singh and another (LRs of Avtar Singh) ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.J. VAZIFDAR, CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL Present:- Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. Pankaj Jain, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Sachin Bhardwaj, Advocate, Mr. Divya Suri, Advocate, and Mr. Gaurav Mittal, Advocate, for the respondents. * * * * S.J. VAZIFDAR, C.J. (ORAL) Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is ` 17,20,687/- (approx.), she has instructions to withdraw the present appeal in view of the circular No. 21/2015 dated 10.12.2015 issued by the C.B.D.T., New Delhi. However, she 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. (S.J. VAZIFDAR) CHIEF JUSTICE (DEEPAK SIBAL) JUDGE 11.08.2016 Amodh Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No√ Whether reportable Yes/No√ Amodh Sharma 2016.08.12 11:23 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →