Punjab & Haryana High Court Judgments — 2021

The High Court allowed the application for withdrawal of the appeal. The Court noted that the applicant-appellant had filed an application seeking withdrawal of the main appeal, supported by an affidavit. The respondent, the Income Tax Department, had no objection to this prayer. Consequently, the Court allowed the prayer made in CM-2294-CII-2021. At the request of the counsel for the parties, the main appeal (ITA-376-2014) was taken on board and disposed of as withdrawn. No decision was made on the merits of the appeal.

The High Court allowed the application for withdrawal of the appeal. The Court noted that the prayer in CM No. 2323-CII of 2021 was for the withdrawal of the appeal preferred by the applicant-appellant, supported by an affidavit. The counsel for the respondent (Income Tax Department) accepted notice and stated there was no objection to the prayer. Consequently, the Court allowed the application and, at the request of the parties' counsel, took the main appeal on board and disposed of it as withdrawn. No decision was made on the merits of the original appeal.

The High Court allowed the application for withdrawal of the appeal. The Court noted that the prayer in CM No.2412-CII of 2021 was for withdrawal of the appeal preferred by the applicant-appellant, supported by an affidavit. The counsel for the respondent (Income Tax Department) accepted notice and stated no objection to the prayer. Consequently, the Court allowed the prayer made in the civil miscellaneous application and, at the request of the parties, took the main appeal on board and disposed of it as withdrawn. No decision was made on the merits of the appeal.

The High Court allowed the application for withdrawal of the appeal. The Court noted that the appellant had filed an application for withdrawal of the appeal, supported by an affidavit. The revenue, through its counsel, stated that it had no objection to the prayer made in the application. Consequently, the Court allowed the prayer made in CM No.2310-CII of 2021 and, at the request of the parties' counsel, took the main appeal on board and disposed of it as withdrawn. No decision was made on the merits of the appeal.

The High Court allowed the application for withdrawal of the appeal. The Court took the main appeal on board at the request of the parties and disposed of it as withdrawn. The reasoning was based on the assessee's explicit request for withdrawal, supported by an affidavit, and the absence of any objection from the Revenue. Therefore, the appeal was not decided on its merits. No specific issue was left undecided as the appeal itself was withdrawn.

The High Court allowed the application for withdrawal of the appeal. The Court noted that the prayer for withdrawal was made by the applicant-appellant, supported by an affidavit. The Revenue had no objection to this prayer. Consequently, the main appeal was taken on board and disposed of as withdrawn, as requested by the parties. No decision was made on the merits of the appeal.

The High Court allowed the application for withdrawal of the appeal. The Court noted that the prayer in C.M. No.2285-CII of 2021 was for withdrawal of the appeal preferred by the applicant-appellant, supported by an affidavit. The counsel for the respondent (revenue) accepted notice and stated there was no objection to the prayer. Consequently, the prayer made in C.M. No.2285-CII of 2021 was allowed, and at the request of the parties' counsel, the main appeal was taken on board and disposed of as withdrawn. No decision was made on the merits of the original appeal.

The High Court allowed the application for withdrawal of the appeal. The appellant was granted liberty to withdraw the appeal to take benefit of the Vivad se Vishwas scheme.

The High Court allowed the application for withdrawal of the appeal. The court noted that the appellant wished to take benefit of the Vivad Se Vishwas Tak Scheme, which covers the case. The revenue had no objection to this prayer. Consequently, the main appeal was taken on board and dismissed as withdrawn, as prayed for by the appellant. The operative direction was the dismissal of the appeal as withdrawn. No specific issue regarding the merits of the original appeal was decided.

The High Court allowed the application for withdrawal of the appeal. In view of the assessee availing the 'Vivad Se Vishwas 2020' scheme, the appeal filed by the appellant-assessee under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was dismissed as withdrawn. No decision was rendered on the merits of the issues that were before the Tribunal. The operative direction was to dismiss the appeal as withdrawn.

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. This decision was based on the statement made by the learned counsel for the appellant, who indicated that the appellant wished to avail the 'Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2020'. The court accepted this submission and disposed of the appeal accordingly. Any pending miscellaneous applications were also disposed of as a consequence of the appeal being dismissed as withdrawn. The court did not delve into the merits of the case.

The High Court allowed the application for withdrawal. The Court noted that the appellant's grievance had been redressed under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2020. The respondents had no objection to the withdrawal. Consequently, the main appeal was ordered to be dismissed as withdrawn. The Court did not decide on the merits of the original appeal. The principle established is that an appeal can be withdrawn if the underlying dispute is settled under a tax settlement scheme, with the consent of both parties.

The High Court allowed the application for withdrawal of the appeal. The Court granted the assessee the liberty to approach the respondent under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020. Furthermore, the Court permitted the assessee to move an application for restoration of the appeal in case the offer under the scheme was not accepted. The main appeal was consequently dismissed as withdrawn. No specific findings were made on the merits of the original appeal, as it was disposed of on procedural grounds. The operative direction was the dismissal of the appeal as withdrawn with the granted liberty.

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh, dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The dismissal was granted with the liberty for the assessee to avail the benefit of the ‘VIVAD SE VISHWAS 2020’ scheme. The court did not decide on the merits of the case, as the appeal was withdrawn by the assessee. The specific findings of the ITAT regarding the sale of shares being undisclosed income, and the consequent tax demand, interest, and penalty, were therefore not adjudicated upon by the High Court in this proceeding.

The High Court allowed the application for dismissal of the appeal. The Court's decision was based on a circular (Annexure R-1) dated 10.12.2015, which sets a monetary limit for filing appeals. According to this circular, appeals are not maintainable where the excess tax involved is Rs. 1,00,00,000/- or less. The Court found that the present appeal fell within this category, making it non-maintainable. Consequently, the main appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed. The Court did not delve into the merits of the original appeal, as the dismissal was purely on procedural grounds related to the monetary limit. The ratio decidendi is that appeals filed by the Revenue must adhere to the prescribed monetary limits, failing which they are liable to be dismissed.

The High Court allowed the application for withdrawal. The court granted the appellant liberty to approach the respondent under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020. The court also permitted the appellant to move an application for restoration of the appeal if the offer under the scheme was not accepted. Consequently, the main appeal was dismissed as withdrawn. Any pending applications were also disposed of as a result of the main case being dismissed as withdrawn.

The High Court allowed the application for withdrawal of the appeal. The court granted the appellant liberty to approach the respondent under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020. Furthermore, the court permitted the appellant to move an application for restoration of the appeal in case the offer made under the scheme was not accepted by the respondent. Consequently, the main appeal (ITA-233-2015) was dismissed as withdrawn. Any pending applications related to the main appeal were also disposed of.

The High Court allowed the application for withdrawal of the appeal. The court granted the appellant liberty to approach the respondent under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020. Furthermore, the court permitted the appellant to move an application for restoration of the appeal in case the offer under the scheme was not accepted. The main appeal was accordingly dismissed as withdrawn. No specific findings were made on the merits of the original appeal as it was withdrawn.

The High Court granted the assessee's application for leave to withdraw the appeal. The reasoning provided is that the assessee had filed a declaration in Form-3 seeking benefit under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020, read with the relevant Rules. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn. The High Court did not decide the merits of the original appeal filed against the ITAT's order. The operative direction was to dismiss the appeal as withdrawn.

The High Court noted that during the course of arguments, it was brought to its notice that the principal amount and due interest up to November 2019 had already been processed and released in favour of the petitioner(s). The learned counsel for the respondents fairly conceded that the process of computing the interest from December 2019 till the date of payment was under process and would be completed within four weeks. In view of this conceded position by the respondents, the Court was of the considered view that all the writ petitions had been rendered infructuous. The Court ordered accordingly, making it clear that if there was any difference in calculation or any clarification was required, the parties would be at liberty to file a miscellaneous application. No specific issue was left undecided; the petitions were disposed of as infructuous based on the conceded position.

The High Court allowed the application for withdrawal of the appeal. The Court noted that the assessee had filed an application seeking permission to withdraw the appeal with liberty to approach the respondent-department to settle the dispute under the "Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020". The Revenue, through its learned Senior Standing Counsel, stated that it had no objection to the prayer made in the application. Consequently, the Court allowed CM No. 362-CII of 2021 and dismissed ITA No. 240 of 2012 as withdrawn, granting liberty to the applicant-appellant to approach the respondent-department for settlement under the aforementioned Act. No decision was made on the merits of the original appeal.

The High Court allowed the application to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to approach the department for settlement under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020.

The High Court allowed the application for withdrawal of the appeal. The Court noted that the assessee had filed the appeal against the ITAT's order upholding a penalty of Rs. 1 lac under Section 271-BA for the assessment year 2003-04. The assessee's request to withdraw the appeal was made with the intention of settling the dispute under the "Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020". The revenue did not object to this request. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, granting the assessee liberty to approach the respondent-department for settlement under the aforementioned Act. No decision was made on the merits of the original appeal.

The High Court allowed the application to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the appellant to approach the department for settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Act.

The High Court allowed the application for withdrawal of the appeal. The Court noted that the appellant-assessee had filed the application seeking permission to withdraw the appeal with liberty to approach the respondent-department to settle the dispute under the "Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020". The learned counsel for the respondent-department stated that he had no objection to the prayer made in the application. Consequently, the main appeal was taken up for hearing and was dismissed as withdrawn. The appellant-assessee was granted liberty to approach the respondent-department for settlement under the aforementioned Act. No decision was made on the merits of the original appeal.

The High Court allowed the application for withdrawal of the appeal. Consequently, the main appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.