CIT PATIALA vs. M/S H.M.M.LTD.NABHA
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court decided to dismiss the appeal as withdrawn. The reasoning provided by the appellant-revenue was that the tax effect was below the prescribed monetary limits for filing appeals, as per the relevant CBDT circulars. Consequently, the counsel for the appellant-revenue sought permission to withdraw the appeal. The Court granted liberty to the appellant-revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal if circumstances warranted it. The operative direction was to dismiss the appeal as withdrawn with the liberty granted. Any pending Civil Miscellaneous (C.M.) Application was also disposed of as a consequence of the main case being dismissed.
What were the facts?
The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala (appellant-revenue) against M/s. H.M.M. Limited, Nabha (respondent-assessee). The assessment year(s) are not specified in the judgment. The order or action under challenge is the High Court's decision on Income Tax Reference (ITR) No. 391 of 1995. The amount in dispute is not stated. The procedural history is that the appeal was listed for hearing before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the appeal filed by the revenue should be withdrawn based on the monetary limits prescribed by CBDT Circulars. The appellant-revenue argued that the tax effect involved is less than the monetary limit prescribed in 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, and therefore, they have instructions to withdraw the appeal. The respondent-assessee did not present any arguments as none appeared for them.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITR No. 391 of 1995 Date of decision : 07.11.2019 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala ..... Appellant versus M/s. H.M.M. Limited, Nabha. ..... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE ALKA SARIN *** Present : Ms.Urvashi Dhugga, Advocate for the appellant. None 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. 3. Since the main case has been dismissed, the pending C.M. Application, if any, also stands disposed of. (AJAY TEWARI) JUDGE ( ALKA SARIN ) JUDGE 07.11.2019 raman Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No RAMAN KUMAR 2019.11.08 11:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S.Sidhivinayak Roadways, Sundergarh vs. Commissioner Of GST And Central Excise, Rourkela Commissionerate, RourkelaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Dillip Kumar Behera vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Mayurbhanj CircleOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Kalinga Paper Mart, Sundergarh vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Kabita Nayak vs. Chief Commissioner, CGST, Central Excise And Customs, KhurdaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Swastika Ingot PVT.LTD, Sundargarh vs. The Addl Commissioner, GST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
