PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-04 vs. M/S GLITZ BUILDERS AND PROMOTERS PVT LTD
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court of Delhi, comprising Justices Vibhu Bakhru and Swarana Kanta Sharma, decided to dismiss the appeal filed by the Revenue. The reasoning was based on the submission made by the Revenue's counsel that the tax effect involved in the appeal was below the monetary threshold prescribed by the Circular dated 17.09.2024, and no exceptions applied. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed on the ground of low tax effect, without delving into the merits of the ITAT's order. The operative direction was the dismissal of the appeal. No issues were left undecided; the appeal was disposed of on a preliminary procedural ground.
What were the facts?
The Revenue, identified as the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-04, filed an appeal before the High Court of Delhi against an order dated 27.01.2021 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in ITA No. 1751/Del/2013. This order pertained to the assessment year 2007-08 and concerned the assessee, M/s Glitz Builders and Promoters Pvt Ltd. The appeal was filed by the Revenue challenging the ITAT's decision. The amount in dispute was not explicitly stated, but the procedural history leading to the High Court appeal involved the ITAT's order.
What were the issues?
The primary issue before the High Court was whether the appeal filed by the Revenue should be entertained. The Revenue's contention, as stated by its counsel, was that the tax effect involved in the present appeal was below the threshold limit of ₹2,00,00,000/- as stipulated in the Circular dated 17.09.2024. The Revenue further argued that the appeal was not covered by any exceptions set out in the said circular. The judgment does not record any arguments from the assessee's side regarding this specific point.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
$~22 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 547/2022, CM APPLs. 55258/2022 & 55259/2022
PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-04 .....Appellant Through: Mr. Anurag Ojha, SSC with Ms. Hemlata Rawat and Mr. V.K. Saksena, JSCs.
versus
M/S GLITZ BUILDERS AND PROMOTERS PVT LTD .....Respondent Through: Mr. Piyush Kaushik and Mr. Tanveer Zaki, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SWARANA KANTA SHARMA
O R D E R %
14.11.2024 1. The Revenue has filed the present appeal impugning an order dated 27.01.2021 passed by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in ITA No. 1751/Del/2013 for the assessment year 2007-08. 2. At the outset, the learned counsel appearing for the Revenue states that the tax effect involved in the present appeal is below the threshold limit of ₹2,00,00,000/- as stipulated in the Circular dated 17.09.2024 and is not covered by any exceptions as set out in the circular. 3. Accordingly, the present appeal is dismissed on account of low tax effect.
VIBHU BAKHRU, J
SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J NOVEMBER 14, 2024 akc
Click here to check corrigendum, if any 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 25/11/2024 at 14:26:14
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Saudamini Samantray vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Bhubaneswar IiOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Keshav Rice Mill, Ganjam vs. Chief Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, KatakaOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Nanda Contruction PVT. LTD., Angul vs. Additional Commissioner, GST And Central Excise Commissionerate, SundergarhOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Utkal Suppliers,Ganjam vs. Assistant Commissioner Of CT And GST, Ganjam-I Circle,GanjamOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of Hte Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
