PAL ENTERPRISES

PDF · subscribers
ITA - 233 / 2012HC Delhi24 April 20121 pages
For Petitioner: SANTOSH AGGARWAL
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was not right in deciding the appeal based on the ratio in CIT vs. M/s Kalapataru Colours and Chemicals (2010) 328 ITR 451, as this decision was reversed by the Supreme Court in Topman Exports Vs. CIT (2012) 3 SCC 593. The substantial question of law was answered in the negative, in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. The reasoning was that the Supreme Court's binding precedent supersedes the High Court's earlier decision. The operative direction was to set aside the impugned order of the Tribunal and remit the matter back to the Tribunal for a fresh decision, keeping in mind the Supreme Court's judgment. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The appeal before the High Court of Delhi concerns ITA 233/2012, filed by Pal Enterprises (the assessee) against the Commissioner of Income Tax (the revenue). The assessment year(s) are not specified. The challenge is to an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) dated September 22, 2011. The procedural history involves the High Court setting aside the ITAT's order in light of a Supreme Court decision. The parties agreed to this course of action. The ITAT's order was based on the ratio of the Bombay High Court's decision in CIT vs. M/s Kalapataru Colours and Chemicals (2010) 328 ITR 451, which was subsequently reversed by the Supreme Court in Topman Exports Vs. CIT (2012) 3 SCC 593.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in following and deciding the appeal on the basis of the ratio expounded in CIT vs. M/s Kalapataru Colours and Chemicals (2010) 328 ITR 451? (Question of law). The assessee contended that the ITAT's order should be set aside in view of the Supreme Court's decision in Topman Exports Vs. CIT (2012) 3 SCC 593, which reversed the Bombay High Court's decision in CIT vs. M/s Kalapataru Colours and Chemicals. The revenue agreed with this submission. No specific arguments were recorded for the revenue other than their agreement to the assessee's position.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 6,Section 8,Section 9,Section 10,Section 11

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI . . . ITA 233/2012 . . . PAL ENTERPRISES ..... Appellant . Through Mr. Santosh Aggarwal, Adv. . . . versus . . . CIT ..... Respondent . Through Mr. Kiran Babu, sr. standing counsel . . . CORAM: . HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA . HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR . . . O R D E R . 24.04.2012 . . . Ld. counsel for the parties agree that the impugned order of the . Tribunal dated 22.9.2011 may be set aside in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Topman Exports Vs. CIT (2012) 3 SCC 593, which has reversed the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT . vs. M/s Kalapataru Colours and Chemicals (2010) 328 ITR 451. Accordingly, we frame the following substantial question of law:- . ?whether the Income tax Appellate Tribunal was right in following and deciding the appeal on the basis of ratio expounded in CIT . vs. M/s Kalapataru Colours and Chemicals (2010) 328 ITR 451?? . . . The aforesaid question in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in Topman Exports Vs. CIT (2012) 3 SCC 593has to be answered in negative i.e.in favour of appellant-assessee and against the respondent-Revenue. Impugned order of the Tribunal is set aside and an order of remit is passed. The Tribunal will decide the appeal afresh, keeping in mind the aforesaid judgment of the Supreme Court. The appeal is disposed of. . . . SANJIV KHANNA, J . . . . . . . R.V.EASWAR, J . APRIL 24, 2012 . vld . . . $ 6 and 8 to 11 . . .

More judgments on Section 6

All 340 judgments and leading authorities on Section 6 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →