COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. S.R.F. LIMITED

ITA - 375 / 2008HC Delhi29 April 20081 pages

For Petitioner: PREM LATA BANSAL

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that no substantial question of law arises from the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. This conclusion was based on the concession made by the learned counsel for the Revenue, who acknowledged that the present appeal was covered by the High Court's own prior decision in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Woodward Governor India P. Ltd., [2007] 294 ITR 451 (Delhi). The principle established in that case, and relied upon here, is that if an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, does not involve a substantial question of law, it is liable to be dismissed. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue. No specific issue was left undecided.

What were the facts?

The Revenue, represented by the Commissioner of Income Tax, is aggrieved by an order dated 17th July, 2008, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Delhi Bench 'B'. This order pertains to appeals filed by the assessee, S.R.F. Limited, for the Assessment Years 1998-99 and 1999-2000. The Revenue has filed an appeal before the High Court challenging the ITAT's decision. The amount in dispute is not specified in the judgment. The procedural history involves the ITAT passing an order which the Revenue is now challenging before the High Court.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should entertain the Revenue's appeal against the ITAT's order, considering the provisions of Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which requires a substantial question of law to be involved. Contentions: Assessee: Not recorded. Revenue: The learned counsel for the Revenue fairly submits that in view of the decision of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Woodward Governor India P. Ltd., [2007] 294 ITR 451 (Delhi), no substantial question of law arises. Therefore, the appeal should be dismissed.

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 DELHI AT NEW DELHI . ITA 375/2008 . COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Appellant Through Mrs. P.L. Bansal, Adv. . versus . . S.R.F. LIMITED ... Respondent Through Mr. Sandeep Karhail, Adv. . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN B. LOKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH . . O R D E R 29.04.2008 . . The Revenue is aggrieved by an order dated 17th July, 2008 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench ?B? in ITA Nos. 2724/Del/2004 and 2725/Del/2004 relevant for the Assessment Years 1998-99 and 1999-2000. . . Learned counsel for the Revenue fairly submits that in view of the decision of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Woodward Governor India P. Ltd., [2007] 294 ITR 451 (Delhi), no substantial question . ITA No. 375/2008 Page 1 of 2 of law arises. The appeal is dismissed. . . MADAN B. LOKUR, J . . . MANMOHAN SINGH, J APRIL 29, 2008 vk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ITA No. 375/2008 Page 2 of 2 .

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →