THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II, AMRITSAR vs. M/S J.S. GROVER CONSTRUCTION, PATHANKOT (PAN: AAHFJ3327N)
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The court granted the appellant-revenue the liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal, as prayed for. The reasoning behind the dismissal is solely based on the appellant-revenue's submission that the tax effect was below the prescribed monetary limit for filing appeals, as per the CBDT circulars. The court also noted that any pending civil miscellaneous applications (C.M.) related to the main appeal would stand disposed of. No specific findings on the merits of the case were made, and no ratio decidendi for future cases was established beyond the procedural aspect of withdrawal based on tax effect.
What were the facts?
The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Amritsar (the appellant-revenue) against M/s. J.S.Grover Construction (the respondent). The assessment year(s) are not specified. The appeal challenges an order or action by an unspecified lower authority. The amount in dispute is not explicitly stated, but the tax effect is mentioned as being below the prescribed monetary limit. The procedural history is that the revenue has filed this appeal before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn due to the tax effect being below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 3 of 2018 and subsequent amendments. The appellant-revenue argued that due to the low tax effect, they have instructions to withdraw the appeal. They also prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if circumstances change. The respondent's arguments are not recorded in the judgment.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 229 ITA-98-2018 (O&M) Date of decision :25.9.2019 The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Amritsar ...... Appellant versus M/s. J.S.Grover Construction ...... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL Present : Mr. Vivek Sethi, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr. Varun Issar, Jr. 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. 3. Since the main case has been dismissed as withdrawn, the pending C.M, if any also stands disposed of. (AJAY TEWARI) JUDGE (HARNARESH SINGH GILL) JUDGE 25.9.2019 anuradha Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No Anuradha 2019.09.26 16:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
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
