CIT, FARIDABAD vs. BISHAMBER DAYAL(HUF) VPOL SUKHRALI, GURGAON

PDF · subscribers
ITA/959/2008HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01081003200804 October 2016Author: MR. JUSTICE M.M. AGGARWAL,MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN1 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted that the learned counsel for both the appellant (Revenue) and the respondent (assessee) were in agreement that the questions of law raised in the present appeal were identical to those raised in ITA-775-2008, titled 'The Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula Vs. Rani Tara Devi'. This earlier appeal had been disposed of by the High Court through a judgment and order dated 04.08.2016. Based on this consensus, the High Court held that the present appeal should also be disposed of in the same terms as the judgment in ITA-775-2008. The specific findings and reasoning from the judgment in ITA-775-2008 are not detailed in this order, but the principle applied is that consistent legal issues, when agreed upon by the parties, should be decided uniformly.

What were the facts?

The Revenue, Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad, has filed an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, challenging an order dated 14.03.2008 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'E', New Delhi. The appeal pertains to the assessment year 1997-98. The parties have agreed that the questions of law in this appeal are identical to those in ITA-775-2008, which was decided by the High Court on 04.08.2016. Consequently, this appeal is to be disposed of in the same terms as the aforementioned case.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the questions of law raised in this appeal are the same as those raised in ITA-775-2008 'The Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula Vs. Rani Tara Devi'. (Question of fact/mixed fact and law, turning on the procedural history and agreement of parties). Assessee's Contention: Not recorded. Revenue's Contention: The questions of law are identical to those in ITA-775-2008, and therefore, this appeal should be disposed of in the same terms as that judgment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Sr. No. 202

ITA-959-2008

Decided on : 04.10.2016 Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad

..... Appellant

VERSUS Shri Bishambar Dayal ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.J. VAZIFDAR, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL Present: Mr.Arun Sharma, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr.S.S.Kharb, Advocate, for the respondent.

******* S.J.VAZIFDAR, CHIEF JUSTICE (ORAL) The present appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 has been preferred by the revenue to challenge therein order dated 14.03.2008, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'E', New Delhi.

The appeal pertains to the assessment year 1997-98. Learned counsel for the parties are ad-idem that the questions of law raised in this appeal are the same as those raised in ITA-775-2008 “The Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula Vs. Rani Tara Devi”, which we disposed of by our judgment and order dated 04.08.2016. This appeal is also disposed of in the same terms.

[ S.J. VAZIFDAR ] CHIEF JUSTICE 04.10.2016

[ DEEPAK SIBAL ] shamsher JUDGE Whether reasoned/speaking : Yes / No Whether reportable : Yes / No Shamsher Singh 2016.10.05 10:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →