PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 vs. M/S ANG STRUCTURE AND ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED

PDF · subscribers
ITA/47/2024HC DelhiDLHC01059135202318 January 2024Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA1 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that there was no justification for the institution of the instant appeal by the Revenue. The Court noted that the impugned order of the ITAT, particularly paragraph 3, indicated a remit to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) which was not objected to by the Department. The Court further observed that the proposed remand was supported and conceded to by the Department. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed. The ratio decidendi is that an appeal filed against an order where the appellant had previously conceded to the operative part of that order lacks merit and justification. The operative direction was to dismiss the appeal with costs.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Revenue) against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The ITAT's order, specifically paragraph 3, indicated a remit to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The Department, represented by the Revenue, had not objected to this proposed remand. In fact, the remand was supported and conceded to by the Department. The High Court noted that there was no justification for the Revenue to have filed the instant appeal given their earlier stance.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Revenue had grounds to appeal the ITAT's order when it had previously conceded to and supported the proposed remand to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)? Assessee's contentions: Not recorded. Revenue's contentions: The Revenue, through its Senior Standing Counsel, had supported and conceded to the proposed remand by the ITAT to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Despite this, the Revenue filed the present appeal before the High Court.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~61 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 47/2024, CM APPLs 2975-76/2024 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 .....Appellant Through: Mr. Prashant Meharchandani (Senior Standing Counsel) with Mr. Akshat Singh (Junior Standing Counsel).

versus

M/S ANG STRUCTURE AND ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED ..... Respondent

Through: None.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR

KAURAV

O R D E R %

18.01.2024 A reading of the impugned order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and more particularly paragraph 3 thereof shows that the remit to the forum of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was not objected to by the Department. In fact the proposed remand was supported and conceded to. In view of the aforesaid, we find ourselves unable to find any justification for the institution of the instant appeal. The same shall consequently stand dismissed with costs of Rs. 25,000/- to be deposited with the Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee.

YASHWANT VARMA, J.

PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J. JANUARY 18, 2024/neha 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 03/07/2025 at 00:19:39

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →