C I T vs. M/S ROCKMAN CYCLES
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn with liberty granted to the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal as prayed for. The Court clarified that the withdrawal of the appeal by the revenue would not be considered an affirmation of the ITAT's order on merits. Furthermore, the legal issue, as claimed by the revenue, was left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. No specific finding on the merits of the ITAT's order was given as the appeal was withdrawn.
What were the facts?
The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Ludhiana-II (the revenue) against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The assessee is M/s Rockman Cycle Ind. Ltd., Ludhiana. The tax effect involved in the appeal was Rs. 2,40,168/-. The revenue sought to withdraw the appeal based on CBDT Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10.12.2015, which pertains to monetary limits for filing appeals. The revenue also requested liberty to revive the appeal if necessary.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the revenue is permitted to withdraw the appeal based on the tax effect and CBDT Circular No. 21/2015? (Question of law) Assessee's Contentions: Not recorded in the judgment. Revenue's Contentions: The revenue, through its learned counsel, stated that the tax effect involved is Rs. 2,40,168/- and they have instructions to withdraw the appeal in view of CBDT Circular No. 21/2015. They 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
Sr. No. 569 ITA-86-2007
Decided on : 23.08.2016 Commissioner of Income Tax, Ludhiana-II ..... Appellant
VERSUS M/s Rockman Cycle Ind. Ltd., Ludhiana ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.J. VAZIFDAR, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL Present: Mr.Zora Singh Klar, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr.Akshay Bhan, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Alok Mittal, Advocate, for the respondent.
******* S.J. VAZIFDAR, C.J. (Oral) Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is Rs.2,40,168/-, he has instructions to withdraw the present appeal in view of the circular No.21/2015, dated 10.12.2015, 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.
[ S.J. VAZIFDAR ]
CHIEF JUSTICE 23.08.2016
[ DEEPAK SIBAL ] shamsher JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No Shamsher Singh 2016.08.24 17:37 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Basudev Logistics, Jagatsinghpur vs. Principal Commissioner, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Prabhudatta Mishra vs. The Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes And Goods And Services Tax, OdishaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Rajesh Kumar Gupta vs. Joint Commissioner Of GST (Appeal), Territorial Range, BolangirOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Attitude Exim PVT. LTD., Rourkela vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S.Pradeep Kumar Mahapatra, Bhubaneswar vs. Superintendent Bhubaneswar-Iii Circle, CGST Range, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
