COMM. IT, LUDHIANA vs. M/S S.E.L. MANUFACTURING CO. LTD.

PDF · subscribers

ITA/794/2010HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01093765201012 February 2020Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI,MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN1 pages

AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The decision was based on the appellant-revenue's submission that the tax effect was below the monetary limit specified in the relevant CBDT circulars. The court granted the liberty sought by the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal, should any part of it remain viable. The court did not delve into the merits of the case as the appeal was withdrawn by the appellant.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Ludhiana (appellant-revenue) against M/s S.E.L. Manufacturing Co. (P) Ltd. (respondent). The appeal was decided on February 12, 2020, by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh. The counsel for the appellant-revenue stated that the tax effect involved was below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018, as amended by Circular No. 17 of 2019 and Letter No. F.No.279/Misc/M-93/2018-ITJ dated 20.08.2019. Consequently, the revenue sought to withdraw the appeal, requesting liberty to revive it if circumstances warranted. No appearance was made by the respondent.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn based on the tax effect being below the prescribed monetary limit for appeals by the revenue? The appellant-revenue argued that due to the low tax effect, which fell below the monetary threshold stipulated in CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018, as amended, they had instructions to withdraw the appeal. They further requested liberty to revive the appeal if any aspect of it survived. The respondent did not present any arguments as none appeared for them.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No. 794 of 2010 DECIDED ON: FEBRUARY 12, 2020 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I, LUDHIANA APPELLANT VERSUS M/S S.E.L. MANUFACTURING CO. (P) LTD. RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN Present: Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Sr. Standing Counsel with Ms. Pridhi Jaswinder Sandhu, Jr. Standing Counsel, for the appellant. None for the respondent. **** AJAY TEWARI, J (Oral): 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 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. [AJAY TEWARI] JUDGE [AVNEESH JHINGAN] JUDGE FEBRUARY 12, 2020

sham

Whether speaking/ reasoned : Yes / No 2. Whether reportable : Yes / No SHAM SUNDER 2020.02.13 15:40 I attest to the authenticity and integrity of this document HIGH COURT CHANDIGARH

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →