KOHINOOR FOODS LIMITED (FORMERLY SATNAM OVERSEAS LIMITED) vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

ITA - 626 / 2008HC Delhi01 July 20081 pages

For Petitioner: PRAKASH KUMAR

AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Delhi granted the assessee's request to withdraw the appeals. The court acknowledged that the pending rectification applications before the ITAT under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, raised material questions. The court observed that if the rectification applications were decided in favor of the assessee, the appeals would become infructuous. Conversely, if the assessee's stand was not accepted, they would have another opportunity to appeal. Therefore, permission was granted to withdraw the appeals with liberty to approach the court depending on the ITAT's decision on the rectification applications. The appeals were dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed two appeals before the High Court of Delhi against a common order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) on May 18, 2007. These appeals pertained to assessment years 1994-95 and 1995-96. The assessee had also filed separate rectification applications under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, before the ITAT concerning the same issues. The assessee argued that the outcome of these rectification applications was material to the present appeals, and if decided in their favor, the appeals would become infructuous. The assessee sought permission to withdraw the appeals with liberty to approach the court again depending on the ITAT's decision on the rectification applications.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the present appeals would become infructuous if the rectification applications filed by the assessee before the ITAT under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, are decided in favor of the assessee. Assessee's contentions: The assessee contended that the questions raised in the pending rectification applications before the ITAT were material to the present appeals. If the rectification applications were decided in favor of the assessee, the present appeals would become infructuous. The assessee sought permission to withdraw the appeals with liberty to approach the High Court again based on the ITAT's decision in the rectification proceedings. Revenue's contentions: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the revenue regarding the issues or the withdrawal of appeals.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 254(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI . 01.07.2008 . Present: Mr C.S. Aggarwal, Sr Advocate with Mr Prakash Kumar for the Appellant. Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal for the Respondent. . CM Application No.7144/2008 . Exemption is allowed subject to just exceptions. . + ITA 626/2008 . These two appeals are taken up together as they arise out of the common order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal on 18.05.2007 in two appeals concerning the same assessee for the assessment years 1994-95 and 1995-96. The learned counsel for the appellant has pointed out in the memo of appeal, as well as, in the course of arguments that the appellant has already filed separate rectification applications under Section 254 (2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and the same are pending. The questions raised in those rectification proceedings are material for the purpose of the present appeals also and it is apparent Page 1 of 2 that if a decision is taken in favour of the assessee in the rectification proceedings, then the present appeals would become infructuous. On the other hand, if the assessee?s stand is not accepted by the Tribunal, then the assessee would have another opportunity to approach this Court by way of an appeal. In these circumstances, the learned counsel for the appellant / assessee seeks permission of this Court to withdraw these appeals with liberty to approach this Court depending upon the decision taken by the Tribunal in respect of the appellant?s applications under Section 254 (2) of the said Act. Permission is granted. The appeals are dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty. . . BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J . . RAJIV SHAKDHER, J . July 01, 2008 mk . Page 2 of 2 6

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →