M/S ANAND INTERNATIONAL vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
ITA/274/2008HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01080248200821 February 2014Author: MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA,MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted that the Revenue's counsel submitted that the ITAT's order dated 15.05.2009, which dismissed the Revenue's appeal against the deletion of the addition of Rs.36,81,421/-, had become final. This was because no further appeal was filed by the Revenue due to the low revenue effect. Consequently, the Revenue argued that the present appeal has been rendered infructuous. The learned counsel for the appellant stated that he had no instructions regarding this submission. In light of the Revenue's submission and the lack of contrary instructions from the assessee, the High Court deemed it appropriate to dispose of the present appeal as infructuous. Liberty was granted to the appellant to file an application for revival of the appeal if the Revenue's statement was found to be incorrect and something survived therein.

What were the facts?

The assessee, M/s Anand International, Panipat, is in appeal against the order of the ITAT Delhi Bench. The assessment year in question is 2001-02. The appeal challenges the ITAT's order dated 27.07.2007, which confirmed the Commissioner of Income Tax's (CIT) revisional order passed under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on 23.11.2005. The original assessment was completed on 16.01.2004 under Section 143(3). Following the CIT's revision, a fresh assessment order was passed on 15.12.2006, making an addition of Rs.36,81,421/- by disallowing commission expenses. The CIT(A) deleted this addition, but the Revenue appealed to the ITAT. The ITAT dismissed the Revenue's appeal on 15.05.2009, and this order became final due to low revenue effect.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to entertain the appeal against the ITAT's order dated 27.07.2007, which confirmed the CIT's revisional proceedings under Section 263 of the Act, when the subsequent ITAT order dated 15.05.2009, which dealt with the merits of the addition, has become final and rendered the present appeal infructuous? Assessee's contention: The learned counsel for the appellant stated that he has no instructions regarding the revenue's submission that the appeal has become infructuous. Revenue's contention: The Revenue argued that the ITAT's order dated 15.05.2009, which dismissed their second appeal against the deletion of the addition of Rs.36,81,421/-, has become final as no further appeal was filed due to the low revenue effect. Therefore, the present appeal has been rendered infructuous.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A,Section 263,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision:21.02.2014 M/s Anand International, Panipat .... Appellant versus Commissioner of Income Tax, Karnal .... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ANITA CHAUDHRY Present: Mr. Rajiv Sharma, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Yogesh Putney, Sr. Standing Counsel for the Revenue. ***** Ajay Kumar Mittal, J.(Oral)

1.

This appeal has been filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as 'the Act') against the orders of ITAT Delhi Bench in ITA No.1389/DEL/2006 dated 27.07.2007 relating to the assessment year 2001-02 confirming the order dated 23.11.2005 whereby Commissioner of Income Tax had initiated revisional proceedings under Section 263 of the Act.

2.

Briefly few facts as narrated by learned counsel for the respondent may be noticed. The assessment in the present case was completed under Section 143(3) of the Act by the assessing officer on 16.01.2004. The CIT revising the said assessment, passed an order on 23.11.2005 under Section 263 of the Act. It was submitted by learned counsel for the revenue that in pursuance thereof, the fresh order of assessment was passed on 15.12.2006 whereby an addition of Rs.36,81,421/- was made by disallowing commission expenses incurred by the assessee. The assessee carried the matter in appeal where CIT(A) vide order dated 28.03.2008 deleted the addition of Rs.36,81,421/- made on account of commission expenses. The Bura Sonia 2014.03.11 14:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh -2- Revenue against the said order filed second appeal before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, which was dismissed vide order dated 15.05.2009. Learned counsel for the Revenue pointed out that the said order has become final as no further appeal has been filed because of the low revenue effect and, therefore, the matter raised in the present appeal has been rendered infructuous.

3.

Learned counsel for the appellant states that he has no instructions in this regard.

4.

In view of the above, we deem it appropriate to dispose of the present appeal as infructuous. However, in case the statement of the counsel for Revenue is found to be incorrect, liberty is granted to the appellant to file an application for revival of the appeal in case something survives therein. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE 21.02.2014 (ANITA CHAUDHRY) sonia JUDGE Bura Sonia 2014.03.11 14:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →