COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S GARG & PURI ASSOCIATES

ITA - 825 / 2010HC Delhi16 July 20101 pages

For Petitioner: SONIA MATHUR

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the present appeals are covered by the decision of the Apex Court in Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. vs. Hotel Blue Moon, (2010) 3 SCC 259. The reasoning was based on the concession made by the Revenue's counsel. The ratio decidendi is that if a controversy is covered by a binding precedent from the Supreme Court, the appeal should be decided in line with that precedent. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed in limine. No specific relief was granted or deleted, and no issue was left undecided.

What were the facts?

The appeals, ITA 825/2010 and ITA 868/2010, were filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appellant) against M/s Garg and Puri Alias Garg and Puri Associates (Respondent). The appeals challenged orders passed by an authority below, though the specific authority and the assessment years are not detailed in the provided text. The procedural history indicates that the appeals were filed before the High Court of Delhi. The High Court heard the learned counsel for the appellant. The respondent was represented by 'None'. The specific amounts in dispute are not mentioned.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the present appeals are covered by the decision of the Apex Court in Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. vs. Hotel Blue Moon, (2010) 3 SCC 259? (Question of law) Assessee's Contentions: Not recorded in the judgment. Revenue's Contentions: Ms. Sonia Mathur, learned counsel for the appellant (Revenue), fairly stated that the present controversy is covered by the decision rendered by the Apex Court in Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. vs. Hotel Blue Moon, (2010) 3 SCC 259. The Revenue relied on the Apex Court's decision in Hotel Blue Moon.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI . 3. ITA 825/2010 . COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Appellant Through Ms. Sonia Mathur, Advocate . versus . M/S GARG and PURI ALIAS GARG AND PURI ASSOCIATES ..... Respondent Through None . AND . . 6. ITA 868/2010 . COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Appellant Through Ms. Sonia Mathur, Advocate . versus . M/S GARG and PURI ALIAS GARG AND PURI ASSOCIATES ..... Respondent Through None . CORAM: HON?BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON?BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN . O R D E R 16.07.2010 . . ITA No. 825/2010 and 868/2010 Page 1 of 2 . . CM 11954/2010 in ITA 868/2010 Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. . ITA 825/2010 and 868/2010 We have heard Ms. Sonia Mathur, learned counsel for appellants. Ms. Sonia Mathur fairly stated that the present controversy is covered by the decision rendered by the Apex Court in Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. vs. Hotel Blue Moon, (2010) 3 SCC 259. In view of the aforesaid, the present appeals stand dismissed in limine. . CHIEF JUSTICE . . . MANMOHAN, J JULY 16, 2010 rn . . . . . . . . ITA No. 825/2010 and 868/2010 Page 2 of 2 . #4 .

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →