THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ROHTAK vs. M/S DAYANAND CONTRACTOR, VPO KHARAINTI, ROHTAK

PDF · subscribers
ITA/8520/2018HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01143583201806 May 2019Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL,MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The Court granted the liberty prayed for by 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 construed as an affirmation of the ITAT's order on merits. Furthermore, the legal issue claimed by the Revenue was explicitly left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate future case. The Court did not decide the substantive merits of the appeal.

What were the facts?

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Rohtak (Revenue) filed an appeal before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh against an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The appeal was preferred against M/s Dayanand Contractor (assessee). The assessment year(s) are not specified in the provided text. The amount in dispute is stated to be ₹47,86,600/-. The procedural history involves the Revenue filing the present appeal after an order from the ITAT.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue should be withdrawn in view of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018 dated 11th July, 2018, considering the tax effect involved? (Question of law) Contentions: Assessee: No arguments are recorded for the assessee in the provided text. Revenue: The Revenue, through its learned counsel, stated that due to the tax effect of ₹47,86,600/-, it had instructions to withdraw the present appeal in accordance with CBDT Circular No. 03/2018. The Revenue prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if something survives therein.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 108(2) ITA No.8520 of 2018 (O&M) Decided on : 06.05.2019 The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Rohtak . . . Appellant Versus M/s Dayanand Contractor, VPO Kharainti, Rohtak . . . Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL Present: Mr. Sandeep Goyal, Sr. Standing Counsel for the appellant-Revenue. **** AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (Oral) Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is ` 47,86,600/-, he has instructions to withdraw the present appeal in view of the Circular No.03/2018, dated 11th July, 2018, issued by the C.B.D.T., New Delhi. However, he 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. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE May 06, 2019 sonia gugnani (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No SONIA GUGNANI 2019.05.07 11:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →