PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-2 vs. M/S HOME DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA/52/2020HC DelhiDLHC01051909201904 February 2020Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that no substantial question of law arises for consideration in the present appeal. The Court observed that the entire discussion in the impugned ITAT order proceeded on the facts of the case. Given the consistent findings of fact returned by the lower authorities (Assessing Officer, CIT(Appeals), and ITAT), the High Court found no basis to interfere. Consequently, the appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed. The specific additions deleted by the CIT(Appeals) and upheld by the ITAT were not detailed, nor was the reasoning for those deletions elaborated upon in the High Court's order.

What were the facts?

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central-2 (the Revenue) filed an appeal before the Delhi High Court against an order dated September 10, 2018, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Delhi. The ITAT had dismissed the Revenue's appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The CIT (Appeals) had deleted three additions made by the Assessing Officer. The appeal pertains to Assessment Year 2008-09 and concerns M/s Home Developers Pvt. Ltd. (the assessee). The High Court noted that the ITAT's decision was based on the facts of the case and consistent findings of fact by the lower authorities.

What were the issues?

1. Whether a substantial question of law arises for consideration in the appeal filed by the Revenue against the ITAT's order. The Revenue contended that the ITAT's order was appealable. The assessee's contentions are not recorded. The High Court's decision hinges on whether the ITAT's order, which upheld the deletion of additions made by the Assessing Officer, involved a substantial question of law. The Revenue argued for the existence of such a question, while the ITAT and CIT (Appeals) had already decided against the Revenue on the merits of the additions.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~38. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 52/2020

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,

CENTRAL-2

..... Appellant Through: Mr. Raghvendra Singh and Ms. Easha Kadian, Advocates.

versus

M/S HOME DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD

..... Respondent

Through:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

O R D E R % 04.02.2020

C.M. No. 4187/2020

For the reasons stated in the application, the delay in re-filing is condoned.

The application stands disposed of. ITA 52/2020 and C.M. No. 4186/2020

The Revenue appeals against the order dated 10.09.2018 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ Bench, Delhi in ITA No.3521/Del/2012 relevant to the Assessment Year 2008-09. The Tribunal has dismissed the Revenue’s appeal against the order of the CIT (Appeals), whereby the three additions made by the Assessing Officer were deleted by the CIT (Appeals).

We have perused the impugned order and the entire discussion proceeds on the facts of the case. In view of the consistent findings of fact returned by the lower authorities, in our view, no substantial question of law arises for consideration in the present appeal. The same is, accordingly, dismissed.

VIPIN SANGHI, J

SANJEEV NARULA, J FEBRUARY 04, 2020 B.S. Rohella

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →