J C BAMFORD EXCAVATORS LTD. vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -3(1) INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA/721/2019HC DelhiDLHC01032275201920 November 2019Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted the submission of the appellant's counsel that issues 'e', 'c', and 'd' would not survive in view of the dismissal of the Revenue's appeal on account of low tax effect. The appellant further stated that they reserved the right to raise these issues in subsequent years and had instructions not to pursue the present appeal in relation to these issues due to the low quantum involved. Consequently, the Court found no reason to proceed with these issues in the current appeal. The appeal was accordingly dismissed as withdrawn. No specific finding was given on the merits of issues 'e', 'c', and 'd', nor was any ratio decidendi established for these points as they were not pressed.

What were the facts?

The appellant, J C Bamford Excavators Ltd., filed an appeal before the High Court of Delhi against an order related to income tax. The respondent was the Deputy Director of Income Tax, Circle -3(1) International Taxation, New Delhi. The appeal was filed for the assessment year(s) not specified in the judgment. The appellant's counsel stated that certain issues (questions 'e', 'c', and 'd') would not survive due to the dismissal of the Revenue's appeal on account of low tax effect. The appellant reserved the right to raise these issues in subsequent years and had instructions not to pursue the present appeal concerning these issues due to the low quantum involved.

What were the issues?

The High Court had to decide on the appeal filed by J C Bamford Excavators Ltd. The appellant's counsel stated that issues 'e', 'c', and 'd' would not be pursued. The appellant argued that these issues would not survive in view of the dismissal of the Revenue's appeal on account of low tax effect. The appellant also stated that they reserved the right to raise these issues in subsequent years and had instructions not to pursue the present appeal in relation to these issues due to the low quantum involved. The judgment does not record any arguments from the Revenue regarding these specific issues.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~9. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 721/2019

J C BAMFORD EXCAVATORS LTD.

..... Appellant Through: Mr. Mayank Nagi, Ms. Husnal Syali Nagi and Mr. Pulkit Verma, Advocates.

versus

DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -3(1) INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEW DELHI

..... Respondent

Through: Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Advocate.

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

O R D E R % 20.11.2019

Learned counsel for the appellant states that questions „e‟, „c‟ and „d‟ would not survive in view of the dismissal of appeal preferred by the Revenue being dismissed on account of low tax effect. He submits that though all the issues arise, the appellant reserves the right to raise the said issues in subsequent years. The appellant has given instructions not to pursue the present appeal in relation to the said issues in view of the low quantum involved.

The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed as withdrawn.

VIPIN SANGHI, J

SANJEEV NARULA, J NOVEMBER 20, 2019/kd

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →