THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX FARIDABAD vs. M/S KNORR-BREMSE INDIA PVT. LTD.

PDF · subscribers
ITA/161/2021HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01093411202123 August 2022Author: MR. JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA,MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MANCHANDA2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh held that the present appeal is covered by a common judgment dated 10.12.2019 passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of the same Court in a bunch of appeals, including ITA-8535-2018 (Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax, Faridabad vs. M/s Knorr-Bremse India Pvt. Ltd.). Consequently, the High Court dismissed the instant appeal in terms of the aforementioned judgment. The reasoning is based on the principle of judicial precedent, where a coordinate bench's decision on a similar issue involving the same parties and assessment year is binding. The operative direction is the dismissal of the appeal. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The appeal, filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, challenges an order dated 07.08.2020 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench in ITA No. 2278/Del/2017 for the assessment year 2012-13. The appellant is the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad, and the respondent is M/s Knorr-Bremse India Pvt. Ltd. The High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh heard the counsel for the appellant and perused the pleadings. The Court noted that the issue raised in the present appeal is covered by a common judgment dated 10.12.2019 passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of the same Court in a batch of appeals, including ITA-8535-2018 (Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax, Faridabad vs. M/s Knorr-Bremse India Pvt. Ltd.).

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should decide the appeal on merits, considering the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 07.08.2020 for assessment year 2012-13. Assessee's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the assessee, M/s Knorr-Bremse India Pvt. Ltd. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, represented by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad, argued that the issue in the present appeal is covered by a previous judgment of a Co-ordinate Bench of the High Court dated 10.12.2019 in a batch of appeals involving the same assessee. The revenue implicitly sought to have the present appeal decided in line with that precedent.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
110 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-161-2021(O&M) Date of Decision:23.08.2022 Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad ....... Appellant versus M/S KNORR-BREMSE INDIA PVT. LTD. ...... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MANCHANDA *** Present: Mr. T. K. Joshi, Senior Standing Counsel assisted by Mr. Vikram Bali, Junior Standing Counsel for the appellant. *** TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA, J. (ORAL) Instant appeal has been filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench dated 07.08.2020 passed in ITA No. 2278/Del/2017 for the assessment year 2012-13. Having heard counsel at length and having perused the pleadings on record, we are of the considered view that the issue raised in the instant appeal would be covered in terms of common judgment dated 10.12.2019 passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in a bunch of ITAs including ITA-8535-2018 (Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax, Faridabad vs. M/s Knorr-Bremse India Pvt. Ltd.). Accordingly instant appeal is dismissed in terms of judgement SUNITA NAGPAL 2022.08.24 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and

authenticiy of this order/judgment

ITA-161-2021(O&M) -2- dated 10.12.2019 passed by the Coordinate Bench in M/s Knorr-Bremse India Pvt. Ltd.'s case (supra). (TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA) JUDGE (DEEPAK MANCHANDA) JUDGE 23.08.2022 sunita Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No SUNITA NAGPAL 2022.08.24 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →