Commissioner Of Central Excise, Rohtak vs. Sh. A.K. Bansal, Dy. Manager, M/S Saint Gobain Gyproc INDIA LTD
Held
The Court decided to dismiss the appeal as withdrawn. The reasoning was based on the appellant's submission that the tax effect involved was below the monetary limit prescribed by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs letter dated 22.08.2019, leading to instructions to withdraw the appeal. The Court granted the appellant's prayer for liberty to file an application for revival of the appeal in case something survives therein. Consequently, any pending applications related to the main case were also disposed of.
Facts
The appellant, Commissioner of Central Tax, Goods and Services Tax, Rohtak, filed an appeal against an order concerning M/s Saint Gobain Gyproc India Ltd., Jind. The respondent is A.K. Bansal, Dy. Manager of the company. The appeal was filed before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh. The tax effect involved in the case was below the monetary limit prescribed by a letter dated 22.08.2019 issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs. The appellant's counsel stated that they had instructions to withdraw the appeal due to this reason.
Key Issues
1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn by the appellant-revenue, considering the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limit for filing appeals. 2. Whether liberty should be granted to the appellant-revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal if circumstances change. The appellant argued that due to the low tax effect, as per the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs letter dated 22.08.2019, they have instructions to withdraw the appeal. They further prayed for liberty to revive the appeal if any aspect of the matter survives. The respondent did not record any specific arguments in the judgment.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
1014-1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CEA No.2 of 2018 Date of Decision: 06.02.2020 Commissioner of Central Tax, Goods and Services Tax, Rohtak Appellant Versus A.K. Bansal, Dy. Manager, M/s Saint Gobain Gyproc India Ltd., Jind
Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN Present: Mr. Amit Goyal, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Amrinder Singh, Advocate for the respondent. **** AJAY TEWARI, J. (Oral)
Learned counsel for the appellant states that since the tax effect involved is less than the monetary limit as prescribed in letter bearing number F.No. 390/Misc./116/2017-JC dated 22.08.2019 issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and customs, 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.
Since the main case has been dismissed, the pending application, if any, also stands disposed of. [AJAY TEWARI] JUDGE [AVNEESH JHINGAN] JUDGE February 06, 2020
pankaj baweja
Wheth
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.