PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5 vs. SHRI HARI ASSOCIATES
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court observed that the common order passed by the learned Tribunal, which was impugned in the present Tax Appeals, had been recalled by the learned Tribunal itself. Consequently, the learned Senior Advocate appearing for the revenue stated that the revenue did not press the present Tax Appeals. The revenue requested liberty to revive the present Tax Appeals in case it was found that the impugned common order was not recalled. In view of these submissions, the High Court disposed of the present Tax Appeals as 'not pressed' with the liberty granted to the revenue to revive them. No decision was made on the merits of the original appeals.
What were the facts?
The revenue, Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 5, filed four Tax Appeals before the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad. These appeals challenged a common order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), 'C' Bench, Ahmedabad. The impugned order pertained to Assessment Years 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, and 2008-09. The assessee is Shri Hari Associates. Subsequent to the ITAT's common order, the revenue filed Miscellaneous Applications (Nos. 32-35/Ahd/2018) seeking rectification. On July 6, 2018, the ITAT recalled its common order and restored the appeals for re-hearing. The assessee's advocate informed the High Court of this development, though a copy of the recall order was not yet available.
What were the issues?
The High Court was to decide the appeals filed by the revenue against the ITAT's common order. However, the primary issue that arose during the hearing was the subsequent recall of the ITAT's order. The court needed to determine the fate of the revenue's appeals in light of the ITAT's decision to rehear the matters. The revenue's contention, as presented by its senior advocate, was that it did not press the present Tax Appeals because the impugned common order of the ITAT had reportedly been recalled. The revenue requested liberty to revive the appeals if the order was not, in fact, recalled. The assessee's advocate confirmed the recall of the order and the restoration of the appeals for re-hearing.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
C/TAXAP/858/2018 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 858 of 2018 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 820 of 2018 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 859 of 2018 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 860 of 2018 ====================================== PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5 Versus SHRI HARI ASSOCIATES ====================================== Appearance: MR MANISH BHATT, SENIOR ADVOCATE with MRS MAUNA M BHATT(174) for the APPELLANT(s) No. 1 MR VIJAY S RANJAN(6126) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1 ====================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE
Date : 19/07/2018
ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH) 1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned common order passed by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “C” Bench, Ahmedabad (hereinafter referred to as “the learned Tribunal”) in IT(SS)A No.128/Ahd/2014 for the Assessment Year 2005-06, IT(SS)A No.129/Ahd/2014 for the Assessment Year 2006-07, IT(SS)A No.130/Ahd/2014 for the Assessment Year 2007-08 and ITA No.1874/Ahd/2011 for the Assessment Year 2008-09, revenue has preferred the present Tax Appeals. Page 1 of 2
C/TAXAP/858/2018 ORDER 2. Shri Vijay Ranjan, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent – assessee has stated at the Bar that after the impugned common order was passed by the learned Tribunal, the revenue /Department preferred Miscellaneous Application Nos.32 to 35/Ahd/2018 for rectification of the impugned common order and vide order dated 06/07/2018 learned Tribunal has recalled the impugned common order and has restored the Appeals to file for re-hearing. He has submitted that however such an order is recently passed but copy is not available. However, as such, the order has been pronounced in the open Court. He has also placed on record the copy of the Miscellaneous Application No.35/Ahd/2018, which is directed to be taken on record. 3. In that view of the matter, Shri Manish Bhatt, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the revenue does not press the present Tax Appeals as the common order passed by the learned Tribunal impugned in the present Tax Appeals is already reported to be recalled by the learned Tribunal, however has requested to reserved the liberty to revive the present Tax Appeals in case it is found that the impugned common order passed by the learned Tribunal impugned in the present Tax Appeals is not recalled. In view of the above, present Tax Appeals stand disposed of as not pressed with the above liberty. (M.R. SHAH, J.) (A.Y. KOGJE, J.) siji Page 2 of 2
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S N D Waddar And Co vs. Sri Gaurav GuptaKarnataka · 30 Oct 2026
- Kanwar Enterprises Private Limited vs. The Joint Commissioner - State TaxTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Bangi Mines And Minerals vs. The State Of TelanganaTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Arka Business Solutions vs. Principal Commissioner Of CustomsTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Mehra Mac Industries Private Limited vs. The Deputy State Tax OfficerTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
