PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 12 vs. SMT. TARUNA VERMA

PDF · subscribers
ITA/601/2018HC DelhiDLHC01045798201813 September 2018Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted the statement made by the learned counsel for the appellant/Revenue that the tax effect in the present appeal is below Rs. 50,00,000/-. Following Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11th July, 2018, the Court disposed of the appeal without answering the substantial question of law. The substantial question of law was expressly left open. Liberty was granted to the appellant to file an application for revival of the appeal if the case falls under any exception provided in the circular. The ratio decidendi is that appeals with a tax effect below a certain threshold, as per government circulars, can be disposed of without adjudicating the substantial question of law, preserving the right to revival under specific circumstances.

What were the facts?

This is an appeal filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax – 12 (Revenue) against Smt. Taruna Verma (Assessee). The appeal is against an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The assessment year(s) are not specified in the judgment. The amount in dispute is also not explicitly stated, but the tax effect is mentioned as being below Rs. 50,00,000/-. The procedural history involves the Revenue filing the present appeal before the High Court.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the substantial question of law needs to be answered, given the tax effect below Rs. 50,00,000/- and in light of Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11th July, 2018? (Question of law) Assessee's Contention: Not recorded. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue, through its counsel, stated that the tax effect in the appeal is below Rs. 50,00,000/-. Therefore, in terms of Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11th July, 2018, the substantial question of law need not be answered, and the appeal may be disposed of without answering it.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~10 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 601/2018

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX – 12 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Deepak Anand, Jr. Standing Counsel for Revenue.

versus

SMT. TARUNA VERMA ..... Respondent

Through: Mr. Sameep, Advocate.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR

O R D E R %

13.09.2018

Learned counsel for the appellant/Revenue states that the tax effect in the present appeal is below Rs. 50,00,000/- and hence in terms of the Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11th July, 2018, the substantial question of law need not be answered. The appeal may be disposed of without answering the substantial question of law.

Recording the said statement, we disposed of the present appeal without answering the substantial question of law, which is left open.

Liberty is also granted to the appellant to file an application for revival of the appeal if the case is covered by an exception.

SANJIV KHANNA, J

CHANDER SHEKHAR, J SEPTEMBER 13, 2018 MR

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →