CIT-I CHANDIGARH vs. M/S PUNJAB STATE WAREHOUSING CORP. CHANDIGARH

PDF · subscribers

ITA/435/2010HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01093368201013 September 2010Author: MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL,MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL2 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue. The dismissal was based on the concession made by the Revenue's counsel that the issue was covered against the Revenue by this Court's order dated 30.7.2010 in ITA Nos. 275 and 277 of 2010. Therefore, the specific questions of law raised by the Revenue were not adjudicated on merits, but the appeal was disposed of based on precedent. The operative direction was to dismiss the appeal.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Revenue (Commissioner of Income Tax-I) against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Chandigarh Bench, for the assessment year 2004-05. The ITAT's order was passed in ITA No. 292/Chandi/2008 dated 23.9.2009. The assessee is M/s Punjab State Warehousing Corp. The appeal to the High Court was filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, proposing specific questions of law. The High Court noted that the revenue's counsel conceded that the matter was covered by a previous order of the same court.

What were the issues?

1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble ITAT was right in law in allowing relief to the assessee on the basis of material not produced before the Assessing Officer (AO)? (Question of law) 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble ITAT was right in law in allowing relief to the assessee without appreciating the facts that the amount was due from the Punjab Government on account of excess payment? (Question of law) Assessee's Arguments: Not recorded in the judgment. Revenue's Arguments: The revenue argued that the ITAT erred in allowing relief based on material not presented to the AO and without appreciating that the amount in dispute was due from the Punjab Government due to excess payment. The revenue's counsel conceded that the matter was covered by a prior High Court decision.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 13.9.2010 The Commissioner of Income Tax-I ....Appellant. Versus M/s Punjab State Warehousing Corp. ...Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. PRESENT: Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Advocate for the appellant. ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J.

This appeal has been preferred by the revenue under Section 206A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench (B), Chandigarh passed in ITA No. 292/Chandi/2008 dated 23.9.2009, for the assessment year 2004-05, proposing following questions of law:- “i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Hon'ble ITAT was right in law in allowing relief to the assessee on the basis of the material which was not produced before the A.O? ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Hon'ble ITAT was right in law in -2- allowing relief to the assessee without appreciating the facts that the amount was due from Punjab Government on account of excess payment?”

Learned counsel for the revenue fairly states that the matter is covered against the revenue by order of this Court dated 30.7.2010 in ITA Nos. 275 and 277 of 2010. 3. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed. (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) JUDGE September 13, 2010 (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) gbs JUDGE

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →