Cit (Central), Ludhiana v. Ajay Singh Chautala , Sirsa

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH ITA No. 783 of 2010 (O&M) Decided on : 27.02.2016 Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ludhiana . . . Appellant

Versus

Ajay Singh Chautala . . . Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE RAJ RAHUL GARG PRESENT: Mr. Rajesh Sethi, Sr. Panel Counsel with Mr. Pridhi Jaswinder Sandhu, Advocate for the appellant-revenue.

Mr. B.M. Monga, Advocate for Mr. Rohit Kaura, Advocate for the respondent-assessee. **** AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (Oral) Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue submitted that though as per the appeal, the tax effect has been stated to be ` 19,34,428/-, whereas, as per communication dated 25th February, 2016, received from the Income Tax Department, wherein, the tax effect has been calculated at ` 16,07,534/-. Be that as it may, the amount being less than ` 20 lacs, it was not disputed that the same is governed by the circular No.21/2015, dated 10.12.2015, issued by the C.B.D.T., New Delhi. Therefore, learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that keeping in view the aforesaid circular, he has instructions to withdraw the present appeal. However, he prayed that liberty be granted to the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal in case something survives therein.

2.

Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. It is, however, clarified that withdrawal of the appeal by the revenue shall not be taken to be affirmation of order of the Tribunal on merits. Further, the legal issue as claimed by the revenue is being left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case.

(AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE (RAJ RAHUL GARG) February 27, 2016 JUDGE J.Ram JAWALA RAM 2016.03.01 14:37 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh