PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 vs. M/S ANG STRUCTURE AND ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED

ITA - 47 / 2024HC Delhi18 January 20241 pages

For Petitioner: PRASHANT MEHARCHANDANI

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the appeal filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 1 was unjustified. The Court noted that the impugned order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, particularly paragraph 3, indicated a remit to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) which was not objected to by the Department. Furthermore, the proposed remand was supported and conceded to by the Department. In light of this, the High Court found no justification for the institution of the appeal and consequently dismissed it. The ratio decidendi is that an appeal filed against an order where the appellant had previously conceded to the operative part of that order is not maintainable. The operative direction was to dismiss the appeal with costs.

What were the facts?

This case involves an appeal filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 1 (the Revenue) against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The ITAT's order, specifically paragraph 3, dealt with a remit to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The Revenue did not object to this proposed remand; in fact, it supported and conceded to it. The High Court, upon reviewing the ITAT's order, found no justification for the Revenue's institution of the present appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable, given that the Department had conceded to and supported the remand order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Assessee's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the assessee, M/s Ang Structure and Energy Private Limited. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue argued for the maintainability of the appeal, despite having previously conceded to and supported the remand order before the ITAT. The judgment does not specify any particular authorities, circulars, or precedents relied upon by the Revenue.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~61 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 47/2024, CM APPLs 2975-76/2024 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 .....Appellant Through: Mr. Prashant Meharchandani (Senior Standing Counsel) with Mr. Akshat Singh (Junior Standing Counsel).

versus

M/S ANG STRUCTURE AND ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED ..... Respondent

Through: None.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR

KAURAV

O R D E R %

18.01.2024 A reading of the impugned order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and more particularly paragraph 3 thereof shows that the remit to the forum of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was not objected to by the Department. In fact the proposed remand was supported and conceded to. In view of the aforesaid, we find ourselves unable to find any justification for the institution of the instant appeal. The same shall consequently stand dismissed with costs of Rs. 25,000/- to be deposited with the Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee.

YASHWANT VARMA, J.

PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J. JANUARY 18, 2024/neha This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/03/2026 at 13:12:29

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →