COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I vs. M/S S.E. EXPORTS, 90 INDUSTRIAL AREA, BADDI

PDF · subscribers
ITA/792/2010HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01093763201026 September 2018Bench: MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT,MR. JUSTICE SUDIP AHLUWALIA1 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal as not pressed. The Revenue's counsel informed the Court that the tax effect was ₹26,97,431/- and, in light of CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018, which specifies a threshold of ₹50 lacs for appeals, they did not wish to pursue the matter on its merits. The Court accepted this submission and dismissed the appeal. Liberty was granted to the Revenue to seek revival of the appeal if circumstances changed. The question of law was expressly kept open.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Ludhiana (Revenue) against M/s S.E. Exports (Assessee). The assessment year(s) are not specified in the judgment. The appeal challenges an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The tax effect involved in the case is stated to be ₹26,97,431/-. The procedural history leading to this appeal before the High Court is not detailed, other than it being an appeal against an ITAT order.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as not pressed due to the tax effect being below the threshold stipulated in CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018? (Question of law) Assessee's Contention: Not recorded as the assessee's counsel was present but the appeal was dismissed based on the Revenue's submission. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue, through its counsel, stated that the tax effect is ₹26,97,431/-. In view of CBDT Circular No. 3/2018, which sets a monetary limit for filing appeals, and since the tax effect is less than ₹50 lacs, the Revenue 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.792 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 `26,97,431/- 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 →