What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the revenue's application to withdraw the appeal. The withdrawal was not to be considered an affirmation of the Tribunal's order on merits, and the legal issue was left open.

The revenue department filed an appeal before the High Court. The tax effect involved was below the prescribed monetary limit for appeals.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the revenue's decision to withdraw the appeal due to low tax effect, impacting the finality of the Tribunal's order.

PCIT vs Sh, Anil Talwar | Punjab & Haryana High Court 2022

102/3 + 135/3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-47-2019 (O&M) Date of decision: 19.05.2022 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Chandigarh .... Appellant Versus Sh. Anil Talwar .... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN Present: Mr. Yogesh Putney, Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant. ****

TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA, J (ORAL) CM-9681-CII-2021 Application is allowed as prayed for. The accompanying affidavit of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Aayakar Bhawan, Sector 17-E, Chandigarh is taken on record. Main case 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. SUNITA NAGPAL 2022.05.20 10:43 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment

ITA-47-2019 (O&M) -2- 2. Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. It is, however, clarified that withdrawal of the appeal by the appellant-revenue shall not be taken to be affirmation of order of the Tribunal on merits. Further, the legal issue as claimed by the appellant-revenue is being left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. 3. Since the main case has been dismissed, the pending C.M. Application, if any, also stands disposed of. (TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA) JUDGE (PANKAJ JAIN)

JUDGE 19.05.2022 sunita

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes

Whether Reportable : No SUNITA NAGPAL 2022.05.20 10:43 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, CHANDIGARH vs. SH, ANIL TALWAR

What did the High Court hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments