COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. ANIL KUMAR MALHOTRA

PDF · subscribers
ITA/256/2010HC DelhiDLHC01129220200912 September 2018Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the appeal based on the statement made by the counsel for the Revenue regarding the tax effect being below Rs. 50,00,000/- and in view of Circular No. 3/2018. The Court explicitly stated that the appeal was disposed of without examining the issue/question raised, and that the issue/question was left open. No opinion was expressed by the Court. The Court also clarified that if the appeal falls under any exception to the circular, the appellant (Revenue) would be at liberty to file an application for revival, and the Court would then examine the contentions raised by the assessee. The ratio decidendi is that appeals with a tax effect below a certain threshold, as per government circulars, can be disposed of without merits, with the issue left open for future consideration if exceptions apply.

What were the facts?

This is an appeal filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Revenue) against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The assessment year(s) are not explicitly stated. The appeal challenges the decision of the ITAT, the specifics of which are not detailed. The procedural history involves the Revenue's counsel stating that the tax effect in the appeal is below Rs. 50,00,000/-. In light of Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018, the Revenue requested the appeal be disposed of without examining the issue. The assessee's counsel contended that the issue is covered by a previous High Court decision. The High Court recorded the Revenue's statement and disposed of the appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue should be disposed of without examining the merits due to low tax effect, as per Circular No. 3/2018? (Question of law) Assessee's Contention: The issue raised in the appeal is covered by the decision of the Delhi High Court in Arun Shungloo Trust v. Commissioner of Income-tax, [2012] 249 CTR 294 (Delhi). Revenue's Contention: The tax effect in the present appeal is below Rs. 50,00,000/-. Therefore, in view of Circular No. 3/2018, dated 11.07.2018, the appeal may be disposed of without examining the question/issue raised. The issue/question is left open.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~R-43 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 256/2010

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

..... Appellant

Through: Mr. Asheesh Jain, Senior Standing

Counsel with Mr. Shahrukh Goz,

Advocate.

versus

ANIL KUMAR MALHOTRA COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Respondent

Through: Mr. Satyen Sethi, Mr. Arta Trana

Panda and Ms. Gargi Sethee,

Advocates.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR

O R D E R %

12.09.2018

Learned counsel for the Revenue states that tax effect in the present appeal is below Rs. 50,00,000/- and in view of circular No. 3/2018, dated 11.07.2018, the present appeal may be disposed of, without examining the question/issue raised. It may be clarified that the issue/question is left open.

Learned counsel for the assessee submits that the issue raised is covered by the decision of this Court in Arun Shungloo Trust v. Commissioner of Income-tax, [2012] 249 CTR 294 (Delhi).

Recording the statement for the counsel for Revenue, the appeal is disposed of, without examining the issue/question raised, which is

left open. We have not expressed any opinion. We also clarify that in case the present appeal is covered by any exception, the appellant would be at liberty to file an application for revival. If required, we would then examine the contention raised by the assessee.

SANJIV KHANNA, J

CHANDER SHEKHAR, J SEPTEMBER 12, 2018 pv

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →