PR. CIT -1 vs. AVERY DENNISON (INDIA) PVT.LTD.
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court held that no substantial question of law arose for consideration in the Revenue's appeal. This was because the ITAT's impugned order for AY 2011-2012 followed its earlier order for AYs 2007-2008 and 2008-2009. The High Court had previously dismissed the Revenue's appeal against that earlier order on July 28, 2016. Therefore, following its own precedent on the same issue for the same assessee, the Court found no new substantial question of law to address. The appeal was accordingly dismissed. The specific issue decided by the ITAT and the reasoning behind its earlier order are not detailed in this judgment.
What were the facts?
The Revenue (Pr. CIT -1) appealed against an order dated September 9, 2016, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in ITA No. 1701/Del/2016 for Assessment Year (AY) 2011-2012. The ITAT had followed its prior decision concerning the same assessee (Avery Dennison (India) Pvt. Ltd.) for AYs 2007-2008 and 2008-2009. The Revenue's appeal against that earlier ITAT order had been dismissed by the High Court of Delhi on July 28, 2016, in ITA No. 386/2016. The present appeal by the Revenue concerns the same issue that was decided in the previous appeal.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the High Court should entertain the Revenue's appeal against the ITAT's order for AY 2011-2012, given that the same issue for prior assessment years was decided by the High Court in favor of the assessee. (Question of law) Assessee's Contention: The assessee did not explicitly argue any points as the High Court found no substantial question of law. The judgment notes the procedural history where the High Court had already dismissed the Revenue's appeal on the same issue for earlier assessment years. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue filed the appeal against the ITAT's order. The judgment does not record specific arguments made by the Revenue in this particular appeal, but implies they are seeking to challenge the ITAT's decision.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 49 +
ITA 517/2017 PR. CIT -1
..... Appellant Through: Mr Himanshu Sinha and Mr Manan Jain, Advocates
versus
AVERY DENNISON (INDIA) PVT.LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr Rahul Kaushik, Senior Standing Counsel CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
O R D E R %
18.07.2017 1. This is an appeal by the Revenue against the order dated 9th September, 2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in ITA No. 1701/Del/2016 for the Assessment Year (‘AY’) 2011 – 2012.
2.The ITAT in the impugned order followed its earlier order in the Assessee’s own case for AY 2007 – 2008 and 2008 – 2009. The Revenue’s appeal against that order of the ITAT was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 28th July, 2016 in ITA No.386/2016.
ITA 517/2017
Page 1 of 2
Accordingly, the Court finds that no substantial question of law arises for consideration.
4.The appeal is accordingly dismissed.
S.MURALIDHAR, J
PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J JULY 18, 2017 rd
ITA 517/2017
Page 2 of 2
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Chicvogue Fashions Lip, Ganjam vs. State Tax Officer Bhubaneswar- Ii CircleOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Priya, Townhall Road, Cuttack vs. Superintendent Cuttack- I Range, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- Dwaraka Jewellers, Bhubaneswar vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S N D Waddar And Co vs. Sri Gaurav GuptaKarnataka · 30 Oct 2026
- Kanwar Enterprises Private Limited vs. The Joint Commissioner - State TaxTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
