PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(CENTRAL)-1 vs. VIJAY KUMAR KATARIA,

PDF · subscribers
ITA/463/2017HC DelhiDLHC01232799201724 July 2017Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeals filed by the Revenue. The Court noted that the appeals were directed against a common order of the ITAT dated December 6, 2016, for the assessment years 2004-05, 2005-06, 2007-08, and 2006-07. The High Court observed that in a previous order dated April 25, 2016, in ITA No. 263/2016 and other connected matters, the Revenue's appeals for these very assessment years had already been dismissed by the same Court. Therefore, following its own precedent, the Court dismissed the present appeals. No specific finding on the merits of the ITAT's order was made, as the dismissal was based on a prior decision.

What were the facts?

The Revenue, represented by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-1, filed four appeals (ITA Nos. 462/2017, 463/2017, 464/2017, and 465/2017) before the Delhi High Court. These appeals challenged a common order dated December 6, 2016, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The assessment years involved were 2004-05, 2005-06, 2007-08, and 2006-07. The Revenue also filed applications for condonation of delay in filing these appeals. The respondent in these appeals is Vijay Kumar Kataria.

What were the issues?

The primary issue before the Delhi High Court was whether the appeals filed by the Revenue against the ITAT's order dated December 6, 2016, for the assessment years 2004-05, 2005-06, 2007-08, and 2006-07 were to be admitted and decided on merits. The Revenue, through its counsel Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Senior Standing Counsel, sought to pursue these appeals. The judgment does not record specific arguments made by the assessee, Vijay Kumar Kataria, nor does it detail the specific grounds on which the Revenue's appeals were based. However, the context implies the Revenue was challenging the ITAT's decision.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

•( r $~1 to 4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 462/2017 ITA 463/2017 ITA 464/2017 ITA 465/2017 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(CENTRAL)-1 Appellant Through: Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Senior Standing Counsel for Revenue. Versus VIJAY KUMAR KATARIA Respondent Through: CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH ORDER % 24.07.2017 CM APPL. 22488/2017 (Exemption^ in ITA 463/2017 CM APPL. 22490/2017 (Exemption) in ITA 464/2017 CM APPL. 22492/2017 (Exemption) in ITA 465/2017 1.Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. CM APPL. 22487/2017 (Delay in filing) in ITA 462/2017 CM APPL. 22489/2017 (Delay in filing) in ITA 463/2017 CM APPL. 22491/2017 (Delay in filing) in ITA 464/2017 CM APPL. 22493/2017 (Delay in filing) in ITA 465/2017 2. For the reasons stated in these applications, the delay in filing these appeals is condoned and the applications stand disposed of. ITA Nos. 462/2017. 463/2017. 464/2017. 465/2017 Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Signature Not Verified

3.

These connected appeals by the Revenue are directed against a common order dated 6^^ December, 2016 for the Assessment Years (AYs) 2004-05, 2005-06, 2007-08 and 2006-07. 4. In view of the order dated 25^ April, 2016 in ITA No. 263/2016 etc. wherein the appeals ofthe Revenue for these very AYs hav^ already been dismissed by this Court, theseappeals are also dismissed. JULY 24,2017 S.MURALIDHAR, J PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →