COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I LUDHIANA vs. M/S S.E. EXPORTS

PDF · subscribers
ITA/791/2010HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01093762201026 September 2018Bench: MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT,MR. JUSTICE SUDIP AHLUWALIA1 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that in view of CBDT Circular No. 3/2018, the appeal is dismissed as not pressed. The Court granted liberty to the Revenue to seek revival of the appeal if circumstances change. The question of law was also kept open. The reasoning is based on the Revenue's concession due to the monetary limit prescribed by the CBDT circular. The ratio is that appeals with a tax effect below the prescribed limit, as per CBDT circulars, may be withdrawn or not pressed by the Revenue. The operative direction is the dismissal of the appeal as not pressed, with liberty to revive and the question of law kept open.

What were the facts?

This is an appeal filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Ludhiana (Revenue) against M/s S.E. Exports (Assessee). The appeal challenges an order from the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The tax effect involved in the case is ₹27,18,703. The Revenue, through its counsel, stated that due to Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 issued by the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board Direct Taxes (CBDT), which sets a monetary limit for appeals, the Revenue did not wish to press the appeal on merits.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as not pressed, given the tax effect and the CBDT Circular No. 3/2018? (Question of law) Contentions: Assessee: Not recorded. Revenue: The Revenue argued that the tax effect of ₹27,18,703 is less than the threshold stipulated in CBDT Circular No. 3/2018, and therefore, it does not wish to press the appeal on merits.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** ITA No.791 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: 26.09.2018 **** Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Ludhiana ..... Appellant Versus M/s S.E. Exports

..... Respondent CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SUDIP AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. Akshay Bhan, Senior Advocate with 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 `27,18,703/- 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, 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 26.09.2018

(SUDIP AHLUWALIA) Bhumika JUDGE 1. Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes 2. Whether reportable: No Bhumika Bhati 2018.09.28 13:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →