COMMISSIONNER OF INCOME TAX DELHI V NEW DELHI vs. PEAK PLASTONICS PVT. LTD.

PDF · subscribers
ITA/436/2010HC DelhiDLHC01154215200916 November 2018Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the present appeal without examining the question/issue raised. The Court took the statement of the Revenue on record that the tax effect was below Rs. 50 lakhs, and therefore, in terms of Circular No. 3 of 2018, the appeal could be disposed of without answering the issue. The Court clarified that the issue/question raised in the appeal is left open. Liberty was granted to the Revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal if it is found that the matter is covered by an exception. The operative direction was to dispose of the appeal as stated, leaving the issue undecided.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi V New Delhi (Revenue) against Peak Plastronics Pvt. Ltd. (Assessee). The assessment year(s) are not specified in the provided text. The order or action under challenge is the appeal itself, filed before the High Court. The procedural history involves the Revenue stating that the tax effect in the appeal is below Rs. 50 lakhs. This is in accordance with Circular No. 3 of 2018 dated 11th July, 2018.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be disposed of without answering or examining the question/issue raised, given that the tax effect is below Rs. 50 lakhs as per Circular No. 3 of 2018? (Question of law). Contentions: Assessee: No specific contentions are recorded in the judgment. Revenue: The Revenue contended that in terms of Circular No. 3 of 2018 dated 11th July, 2018, the appeal may be disposed of without answering or examining the question/issue raised, as the tax effect is below Rs. 50 lakhs. The Revenue also clarified that the issue/question is left open.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~12 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 436/2010 COMMISSIONNER OF INCOME TAX DELHI V NEW DELHI ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Zoheb Hossain Sr. St. Counsel with Mr.Deepak Anand, Adv. versus PEAK PLASTONICS PVT. LTD. .... Respondent Through: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI O R D E R % 16.11.2018 Counsel for the Revenue states that the tax effect in the present appeal is below Rs.50 lakhs and hence, in terms of Circular No.3 of 2018 dated 11th July, 2018, the appeal may be disposed of without answering or examining the question/issue raised. It may be clarified that the issue/question is left open. Taking the statement on record, we dispose of the present appeal without examining the question/issue raised, which is left open. Liberty is granted to the Revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal in case it is found that the matter is covered by an exception. SANJIV KHANNA, J. ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI, J. NOVEMBER 16, 2018/uj

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →