What did the High Court hold?

The High Court condoned the delay in re-filing the appeal. The Court then closed the appeal as the issue was covered by a prior judgment of the same court.

The Revenue filed an appeal against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. There was a significant delay of 350 days in re-filing the appeal. The Revenue's counsel conceded that the issue was covered by a previous High Court decision.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the delay in re-filing the appeal should be condoned. The secondary issue was the merits of the appeal, which were rendered moot by a prior court decision.

PCIT vs M/S Ansal Properties and… | Delhi High Court 2023

ITA 453/2023

Page 1 of 2 $~43 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI %

Decision delivered on: 17.08.2023 + ITA 453/2023

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1 ..... Appellant Through: Mr Sanjay Kumar, Sr. Standing Counsel with Ms Hemlata Rawat and Ms Easha, Advs.

versus

M/S ANSAL PROPERTIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED ..... Respondent

Through: None.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA [Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)] RAJIV SHAKDHER, J. (ORAL): CM No.42063/2023 [Application filed on behalf of the appellant seeking condonation of delay of 350 days in re-filing the appeal] 1. This is an application moved on behalf of the appellant/revenue seeking condonation of delay in re-filing the appeal. 2. According to the appellant/revenue, there is a delay of 350 days in re- filing the appeal. 3. For the reasons given in the application, the delay in re-filing the appeal is condoned. 4. Accordingly, the application is disposed of, in the aforesaid terms. ITA 453/2023 5. This appeal concerns Assessment Year (AY) 2012-13. Digitally Signed By:NEELAM SHARMA Signing Date:23.08.2023 10:35:25 Signature Not Verified

ITA 453/2023

Page 2 of 2 6. Via this appeal, the appellant/revenue seeks to assail the order dated 19.11.2021 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [in short, “Tribunal”]. 7. Mr Sanjay Kumar, learned senior standing counsel, who appears on behalf of appellant/revenue, fairly, states that issue raised in the instant appeal is covered by the decision of this Court rendered in Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-1 vs. M/s Ansal Properties and Infrastructure, 2023:DHC:5443-DB. 8. Accordingly, the appeal is closed.

RAJIV SHAKDHER JUDGE

GIRISH KATHPALIA JUDGE AUGUST 17, 2023/RY

Click here to check corrigendum, if any

Digitally Signed By:NEELAM SHARMA Signing Date:23.08.2023 10:35:25 Signature Not Verified

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1 vs. M/S ANSAL PROPERTIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED

What did the High Court hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments