COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX III vs. M/S SIKKIM JANSEVA PRATISTHAN

PDF · subscribers
ITA/534/2005HC DelhiDLHC01059535200502 August 2018Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The Delhi High Court held that the appeals were not maintainable. This decision was based on the statement made by the counsel for the Revenue regarding the applicability of CBDT Circular No. 3/2018. The Court noted that the tax effect in respect of the relevant assessment years was below the prescribed amount of ₹50 lacs. Consequently, in view of the statement and the terms of the CBDT Circular, the appeals were dismissed as not maintainable. The ratio decidendi is that appeals filed by the Revenue, where the tax effect is below the threshold stipulated in a subsequent CBDT circular, are to be dismissed as not maintainable.

What were the facts?

These two appeals, ITA 529/2005 and ITA 534/2005, were filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Revenue) against M/s Sikkim Janseva Pratisthan (Assessee). The appeals challenged orders from the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The judgment does not specify the assessment years or the amounts in dispute. The procedural history indicates that these appeals were brought before the Delhi High Court.

What were the issues?

The primary issue before the Delhi High Court was whether the appeals filed by the Revenue were maintainable. The Revenue contended that the appeals were covered by the latest circular of the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT), Circular No. 3/2018 dated July 11, 2018, as the tax effect for the relevant assessment years was below the prescribed threshold of ₹50 lacs. The Assessee's contentions are not recorded in the judgment.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~11,12 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 529/2005, CM APPL. 9853/2005

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

..... Appellant

versus

M/S SIKKIM JANSEVA PRATISTHAN ..... Respondent

+ ITA 534/2005

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX III ..... Appellant

versus

M/S SIKKIM JANSEVA PRATISTHAN ..... Respondent

Present: Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Mr. Asheesh Jain, Standing Counsel for appellant. Mr. Jehangir Mistri, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Vasantiben Patel, Mr. Shailendra Swarup, Ms. Aparajita Swarup, Ms. Bindu Saxena, Advs. for respondent.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA

O R D E R %

02.08.2018

It is stated by counsel for the Revenue that these two appeals are covered in terms of the latest circular of the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) (circular No.3/2018 dated 11.07.2018). The tax effect in respect of the relevant assessment years is much below the prescribed amounts (`50 lacs). In view of the statement and having ITA 529/2005 & ITA 534/2005

page 1 of 2

regard to the terms of CBDT Circular, the appeals are dismissed as not maintainable.

S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J

A. K. CHAWLA, J AUGUST 02, 2018

ITA 529/2005 & ITA 534/2005

page 2 of 2

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →