CIT-II, LDH vs. M/S HINDUSTAN PLASTICS

PDF · subscribers
ITA/851/2010HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01093828201003 September 2019Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI,MR. JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, as prayed for by the appellant-revenue. The Court granted liberty to the appellant-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 construed as an affirmation of the Tribunal's order on merits. Furthermore, the legal issue claimed by the appellant-revenue was left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. The pending C.M. Application, if any, was also disposed of as the main case was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income-Tax-II, Ludhiana (appellant-revenue) against M/s Hindustan Plastics, Dhuri (respondent-assessee). The assessment year(s) are not explicitly stated in the provided text. The appeal challenges an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The procedural history is that the revenue sought to withdraw the appeal due to the tax effect being below the prescribed monetary limit as per CBDT Circulars. The High Court considered the withdrawal request.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn by the appellant-revenue? (Question of procedure) Assessee's Contention: No specific contention is recorded for the assessee as the appeal was withdrawn by the revenue. The judgment does not record any arguments from the assessee's side. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, through its counsel, stated that the tax effect involved is less than the monetary limit prescribed in CBDT Circular No.3 of 2018 dated 11.07.2018, as amended by 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. Therefore, they had instructions to withdraw the appeal. They also prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survived therein.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

ITA No.851 of 2010 (O&M) 1 846 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No.851 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision : 03.09.2019 The Commissioner of Income-Tax-II, Ludhiana ...... Appellant versus M/s Hindustan Plastics, Dhuri ...... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL *** Present : Mr. Vaibhav Gupta, Junior Standing Counsel for the appellant.

*** 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. It is, however,clarified that withdrawal of the appeal by the appellant-revenue shall not be taken to be affirmation of order of the Tribunal on merits. Further, the legal issue as claimed by the appellant-revenue is being left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. POOJA SHARMA 2019.09.04 16:11 I am the author of this document

ITA No.851 of 2010 (O&M) 2 3. Since the main case has been dismissed, the pending C.M. Application, if any, also stands disposed of.

(AJAY TEWARI) JUDGE (HARNARESH SINGH GILL) JUDGE 03.09.2019 pooja sharma-I Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No POOJA SHARMA 2019.09.04 16:11 I am the author of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →