Case LawHigh Court › Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central)...

Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), Gurgaon v. Amit Katyal

High Court 30 Aug 2018 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · phhc
Parties
Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), Gurgaon v. Amit Katyal
Date of order
30 Aug 2018
Assessment year(s)
2006-07, 2007-08
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), Gurgaon v. Amit Katyal, the High Court (2018) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

The order — as passed by the High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH ITA No. 38 of 2018 Decided on : 30.08.2018 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Gurgaon Versus Amit Katyal . . . Appellant(s) . . . Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTALHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN PRESENT: Mr. Rajesh Sethi, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Arun Biriwal, Advocatefor the appellant(s).**** AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (Oral) Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is ` 14,47,150/-, he has instructions to withdraw the present appeal in view of the circular No.03/2018, dated 11[th] July, 2018, issued by the C.B.D.T., New Delhi. 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to the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal in case something survives therein. 2.Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for.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. 3.Learned counsel for the revenue submitted that two more appeals i.e. ITA Nos. 388 & 389 of 2017, have been filed by the Department against the same assessee for the Assessment Years 2006-07 & 2007-08, where the tax effect involved is `3,56,800/- for the Assessment Year 2006-07 and ` 33,32,340/- for the Assessment Year 2007-08. It was stated that the aforesaid appeals are against a composite order dated 30.11.2016 passed by the Tribunal and at the time of filing of the appeal(s) in the High Court, the same were governed by the Circular No. 21/2015, dated 10.12.2015, issued by the CBDT, whereas, now after issuance of Circular No. JAWALA RAM2018.09.04 12:42I attest to the accuracy andauthenticity of this documentChandigarh ITA No. 38 of 2018 03/2018, dated 11[th] July, 2018, of the CBDT, the aforesaid appeals would be governed by it now. It was further stated that the aforesaid two appeals are fixed for 15.10.2018 and prayer for preponing the hearing to some early date has been made. In view of the oral request of learned counsel for the revenue, the date of hearing in the aforesaid appeals is pre-poned from 15.10.2018 to 05.09.2018. Office to list the aforesaid appeals on 05.09.2018. 4.Copy of this order be placed on the files of ITA Nos. 388 & 389 of 2017. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL)JUDGE August 30, 2018 J.Ram (AVNEESH JHINGAN)JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/NoWhether Reportable: Yes/No
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation. Full disclaimer & Terms.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan