PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -10 DELHI vs. PINNACLE CLOTHING COMPANY

PDF · subscribers
ITA/406/2025HC DelhiDLHC01125979202411 September 2025Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the appeal should be closed on the ground of Low Tax Effect. The reasoning provided is that the Revenue itself sought the closure of the appeal on this specific ground. Consequently, the High Court ordered accordingly. The operative direction is the closure of the appeal. No specific tax effect threshold was mentioned in the order. The judgment does not discuss any substantive issues related to the income tax assessment of the assessee.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -10 Delhi (the Revenue) against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The respondent is Pinnacle Clothing Company (the assessee). The Revenue sought condonation for a delay of 32 days in filing the appeal and a further delay of 534 days in re-filing. The High Court condoned these delays. The Revenue then stated that the appeal should be closed on the ground of Low Tax Effect. The High Court ordered accordingly.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be closed on the ground of Low Tax Effect, as argued by the Revenue. The Revenue contended that the appeal should be closed due to Low Tax Effect. The judgment does not record any specific arguments from the assessee on this point, but their presence as respondent implies they would have opposed the appeal if it were to proceed on merits. The Revenue's submission is based on administrative instructions or policies regarding the threshold for pursuing appeals based on tax effect.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~65 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 406/2025 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -10 DELHI .....Appellant Through: Mr. Abhishek Maratha, SSC with Mr. Apoorv Agarwal, Mr. Parth Samwal, JSCs with Ms. Nupur Sharma, Mr. Gaurav Singh, Mr. Bhanukaran Singh Jodha, Ms. Muskan Goel, Mr. Himanshu Gaur and Mr. Nischay Purohit, Advs. versus PINNACLE CLOTHING COMPANY .....Respondent Through: Mr. K. Sampat, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Rajiv K Garg and Mr. Ashish Garg, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR O R D E R %

11.09.2025 CM APPL. 57394/2025 and CM APPL. 57395/2025 (Delay) 1. For the reasons stated in the applications, delay of 32 days in filing the appeal and delay of 534 days in re-filing the appeal is condoned. 2. The applications are disposed of. ITA 406/2025 3. Mr. Abhishek Maratha, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for appellant states that the appeal needs to be closed on the ground of Low 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 20/09/2025 at 12:36:26

Tax Effect. 4. It is ordered accordingly. V. KAMESWAR RAO, J VINOD KUMAR, J SEPTEMBER 11, 2025 cd 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 20/09/2025 at 12:36:26

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →