THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOM TAX 3 LDH vs. M/S NIKKAMAL JEWELLERS 455. THE MALL .LDH

PDF · subscribers
ITA/99/2018HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01119431201809 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The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The court granted the appellant-revenue the liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal, as prayed for. The reasoning for this decision is based on the appellant-revenue's submission that the tax effect involved was below the monetary limit stipulated in the relevant CBDT Circulars, which guided their decision to withdraw the appeal. The court also noted that since the main case was dismissed, any pending C.M. Application also stood disposed of. No specific issue was decided on merits, and the principle that can be cited from this judgment relates to the procedure of withdrawing appeals based on monetary limits and the grant of liberty to revive.

What were the facts?

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-3, Ludhiana (the appellant-revenue) filed an appeal before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh against an order concerning M/s Nikkamal Jewellers, Ludhiana (the respondent-assessee). The assessment year(s) are not specified in the judgment. The appeal was filed against an order passed by an authority below, the details of which are not provided. The amount in dispute is also not stated. The procedural history is limited to the filing of the present appeal by the revenue.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the revenue should be dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to revive, in light of the CBDT Circulars regarding monetary limits for filing appeals. The appellant-revenue, through its learned counsel, stated that due to the tax effect being below the prescribed monetary limit as per Circular No.3 of 2018 dated 11.07.2018, as amended by Circular No.17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019 and Letter No.F.No.279/Misc/M-93/2018-ITJ dated 20.08.2019, they had instructions to withdraw the appeal. The revenue prayed for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal if circumstances warranted. The respondent-assessee's contentions are not recorded in the judgment.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

ITA No.99 of 2018 (O&M) 1 219 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No.99 of 2018 (O&M) Date of decision : 09.09.2019 The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-3, Ludhiana ...... Appellant versus M/s Nikkamal Jewellers, 455 The Mall, Ludhiana ...... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL *** Present : Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Senior Standing Counsel with Ms. Pridhi Jaswinder Sandhu, Junior Standing Counsel for the appellant. Ms. Radhika Suri, Senior Advocate with Mr. M.S.Kanda, Advocate 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. POOJA SHARMA 2019.09.10 17:32 I am the author of this document

ITA No.99 of 2018 (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 09.09.2019 pooja sharma-I Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No POOJA SHARMA 2019.09.10 17:32 I am the author of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →