Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ludhiana v. Suraj Kumar Kohli

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH ITA No. 34 of 2000 (O&M)Decided on : 28.01.2016 Commissioner of Income Tax, Ludhiana, Versus Suraj Kumar Kohli ... Appellant ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTALHON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE RAJ RAHUL GARG PRESENT: Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Advocatefor the appellant. Mr. Salil Kapoor, Advocate andMr. Sumit Lalchandani, Advocatefor the respondent. ++++ AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (Oral) Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that theAssessing Officer while passing the order under Section 158BC(c) readwith Section 143 (3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) forthe block period 01.04.1986 to 11.09.1996 had assessed the undisclosedincome at411,74,560 and directed charging of tax @ 60% thereon undersection 113 of the Act. It was thus urged that in view thereof, the tax effect1S less thanL20 lacs. 2 This fact, however, could not be controverted by the learnedcounsel for the appellant and hesubmitted that keeping in view the circular No.21/2015, dated 10.12.2015 issued by the C.B.D.T., New Delhi, the present appealmay be dismissed as withdrawn. However, liberty may be granted to the revenue tofile an application for revival of the appeal in case something survives therein. 3Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. It is, however,clarified that withdrawal of the appeal by the revenue shall not be taken to beaffirmation of order of the Tribunal on merits. Further, the legal issue as claimedby the revenue is being left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL)JUDGE January 28, 2016 smriti (RAJ RAHUL GARG)JUDGE