COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, vs. SUMITOMO CORPORATION INDIA PVT. LTD.

PDF · subscribers
ITA/643/2016HC DelhiDLHC01095985201621 October 2016Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed both the delay condonation application and the appeal. Regarding the delay, the Court found that the reasons provided by the Revenue did not constitute sufficient cause and indicated neglect and complete inaction. On the question of law, the Court held that no substantial question of law arose as the issues were already decided in previous appeals involving the same assessee for the assessment years 2008-2009 and 2009-2010. The specific cases cited were Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Sumitomo Corporation India Pvt. Ltd. – ITA 83/2015, decided on 05.05.2015 and ITA 538/2016 decided on 19.09.2016. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed in limine.

What were the facts?

The Revenue, Commissioner of Income Tax, filed an appeal against an order concerning Sumitomo Corporation India Pvt. Ltd. The appeal was filed with a significant delay of 1161 days in re-filing. The Revenue cited the pendency of a large number of defective appeals and the reorganization of its panel of counsels as reasons for the delay. The High Court noted that even on merits, the question of law raised was already covered by previous decisions of the court in similar cases involving the same assessee for assessment years 2008-2009 and 2009-2010.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the delay of 1161 days in re-filing the appeal by the Revenue should be condoned. The Revenue argued that the delay was due to the pendency of numerous defective appeals and the reorganization of its counsel panel. The High Court, however, found no justifiable reason qualifying as sufficient cause, attributing the delay to neglect and inaction. 2. Whether a question of law arises for consideration in the appeal. The Revenue contended that a question of law arose, but the High Court observed that the issue was squarely covered by its prior decisions in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Sumitomo Corporation India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA 83/2015, decided on 05.05.2015 and ITA 538/2016 decided on 19.09.2016).

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 643/2016 & C.M.30984/2016 (for delay)

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,

..... Appellant

Through: Mr.Sanjay Kumar and Mr.Dileep Shivpuri, standing counsels

versus

SUMITOMO CORPORATION INDIA PVT. LTD...... Respondent

Through: Mr.Prakash Kumar, Adv.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA

O R D E R %

21.10.2016

There is a delay of 1161 in re-filing of this appeal. No justifiable reason, qualifying as sufficient cause has been furnished. In fact, the reasons provided show neglect and complete inaction as to the fate of the appeal by the revenue. Revenue cites pendency of a large number of defective appeals and reorganisation of its panel of counsels as the ground for condonation of delay. Furthermore, even on the merits, the court notices that question of law urged is squarely covered for AY 2008-2009 & 2009-2010 in other cases (Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Sumitomo Corporation India Pvt. Ltd. – ITA 83/2015, decided on 05.05.2015 and ITA 538/2016 decided on 19.09.2016). Therefore no question of law arises as well.

The delay application and the appeal are therefore dismissed.

S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J

DEEPA SHARMA, J OCTOBER 21, 2016 rb

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →