PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) vs. PHD CHAMBER OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRY

PDF · subscribers
ITA/355/2016HC DelhiDLHC01567920201522 July 2016Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the issues raised in the present appeals were indeed covered in favour of the assessee by the previous decision of the same court in PHD Chamber of Commerce & Industry v. Director of Income Tax-Exemptions (2013) 357 ITR 296 (Delhi). The reasoning was that the present appeals concerned the same assessee and the same nature of issues that had already been decided by the High Court in the cited precedent. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed. The operative direction was the dismissal of both appeals. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The appeals were filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) and Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) against the respondent, PHD Chamber of Commerce & Industry. The appeals challenged orders for assessment years not specified in the judgment. The procedural history involves an application for condonation of delay in re-filing one of the appeals, which was allowed. The core of the matter is that the issues raised in these appeals were stated to be covered in favour of the assessee by a previous decision of the Delhi High Court.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the issues raised in the present appeals are covered in favour of the assessee by the decision dated 19th October, 2012 in PHD Chamber of Commerce & Industry v. Director of Income Tax-Exemptions (2013) 357 ITR 296 (Delhi)? Assessee's Contention: The assessee implicitly relies on the previous High Court decision, as the judgment states the issues are covered in their favour by that ruling. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records no specific argument from the revenue regarding the applicability of the previous decision or any distinguishing facts. The revenue is the appellant, implying disagreement with the lower authority's decision that led to the present appeals.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~2&3 + + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI ITA 321/2016 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION).,... Appellant Through Mr. P. Raychaudhuri, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr. Vibhooti Malhotra, Junior Standing Counsel versus PHD CHAMBER OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRY Respondent Through Mr. C.S. Aggarwal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Prakash Kumar, Advocate AND ITA 355/2016 PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) Appellant Through Mh. P. Raychaudhuri, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr. Vibhooti Malhotra, Junior Standing Counsel versus PHD CHAMBER OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRY Respondent Through Mr. C.S. Aggarwal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Prakash Kumar, Advocate CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE NAJMIWAZIRI ORDER o/o 22.07.2016 ITA 321/2016 & ITA 355/2016 Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Signature Not Verified

1 CM APPL. 18692/2016 (for condonation of delay) 1. For the reasons stated in the application, the delay in re-filing he appeal is condoned. The application is allowed. ITA 321/2016 & ITA 355/2016 2. It is not in dispute that the issues raised in these appeals stand covered in favour of the Assessee for the earlier Assessment Years by the decision dated 19"^ October, 2012 in PHD Chamber of Commerce & Industry v. Director of Income Tax-Exemptions (2013) 357 ITR 296 (Delhi). 3. The appeals are, accordingly, dismissed. S.MURALIDHAR, J NAJMIWAZIRI, J JULY 22,2016 acm ITA 321/2016 & ITA 355/2016 Page 2 of 2

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →