What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. Liberty was granted to the Revenue to revive the appeal if circumstances warranted, and the legal issue was left open for future adjudication.

The Revenue had filed an appeal before the High Court. However, due to the tax effect being below the prescribed monetary limit, the Revenue sought to withdraw the appeal.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the withdrawal of the appeal by the Revenue due to the low tax effect, and the implications of such withdrawal.

CIT vs Shri Yarlagadda Venkateswara Rao | Telangana High Court 2016

215 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-337-2008 (O&M) Date of Decision:29.11.2022 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula .......Appellant Versus Sh.Ashwani Oberoi ......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV BERRY Present:- Mr. Yogesh Putney, Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant. Mr.Akshay Bhan, Senior Advocate with Mr.Sidhant Suri, Advocate for the respondent. ***** TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA J.(Oral) Learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant-revenue refers to a communication dated 07.09.2022 received by him from Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Ambala to submit 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. Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for.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 SUNITA NAGPAL 2022.11.30 10:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

ITA-337-2008 (O&M) -2- Tribunal on merits. Further, the legal issue as claimed by the appellant- revenue is being left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case.

Since the main case has been dismissed as withdrawn, the pending Civil Misc. Application, if any, also stands disposed of.

( TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA ) JUDGE ( SANJIV BERRY ) JUDGE 29.11.2022 sunita Whether Reasoned/Speaking : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No SUNITA NAGPAL 2022.11.30 10:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Commissioner of Income Tax-I vs. Shri Yarlagadda Venkateswara Rao

What did the High Court hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments