THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL-3 vs. BABA GLOBAL LTD.

PDF · subscribers
ITA/769/2017HC DelhiDLHC01288439201726 September 2017Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the questions urged by the Revenue stood answered against them by its previous orders dated December 14, 2016, and December 23, 2016, in appeals involving the same assessee. Consequently, the Court found that no substantial question of law arose for consideration. The appeal was accordingly dismissed. The specific reasoning of the ITAT that led to the setting aside of the assessment or its interpretation of Sections 153 and 153C is not detailed in this High Court judgment, as the High Court's decision is based on its prior pronouncements. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The appeal is filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Central-3 (Revenue) against an order dated December 28, 2016, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in ITA No. 1085/Del/2015 for Assessment Year 2005-06. The ITAT's order pertains to an assessment made under Section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, consequent to a search under Section 132. The Revenue is challenging the ITAT's decision to set aside the assessment and its interpretation of the scope of assessment under Section 153 read with Section 153C. The High Court notes that similar issues involving the same assessee have been decided against the Revenue by earlier orders.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the ITAT was right in law in setting aside an assessment made under Section 153A of the Act consequent to a search under Section 132 of the Act? (Question of law) 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT erred in law and on facts in adopting a restrictive and pedantic interpretation of the scope of assessment under Section 153 read with Section 153C of the Act? (Question of mixed law and fact) 3. Whether the learned ITAT erred in not deciding the issue on merits? (Question of law) Assessee's contentions: Not recorded in the judgment. Revenue's contentions: The Revenue contended that the ITAT erred in setting aside the assessment made under Section 153A, adopted a restrictive interpretation of Section 153 read with Section 153C, and failed to decide the issue on merits. The Revenue relied on previous orders concerning the same assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 153A,Section 132,Section 153,Section 153C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI +

ITA 769/2017

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL-3

..... Appellant Through: Mr.Ruchir Bhatia, Sr.Standing Counsel with Mr.Gaurav Khetrapal, Advocate.

Versus

BABA GLOBAL LTD.

..... Respondent Through: Mr.Ved Jain, Advocate with Mr.Pranjal Srivastava, Advocate.

CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

O R D E R %

26.09.2017 1. This is an appeal by the Revenue against an order dated 28th December, 2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (‘ITAT’) in ITA No.1085/Del/2015 for the Assessment Year (‘AY’) 2005-06.

2.

The questions urged by the Revenue read as under:- “2.1 Whether the ITAT was right in law in setting aside assessment made under Section 153A of the Act consequent to search under Section 132 of the Act?

2.2 Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT erred in law and on facts in adopting a restrictive and pedantic interpretation of the scope of assessment under Section 153 read with Section 153C of the Act?

2.3 Whether Ld. ITAT erred in not deciding the issue on merits?”

3.

The aforementioned questions stand answered against the Revenue by the order dated 14th December, 2016 in ITA Nos. 821, 822/2016 and order dated 23rd December, 2016 in ITA 938/2016 which are Revenue’s appeals in cases involving the same Assessee.

4.

In that view of the matter, no substantial question of law arises for consideration.

5.

The appeal is accordingly dismissed.

S. MURALIDHAR, J.

PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J. SEPTEMBER 26, 2017 ‘anb’

More judgments on Section 153A

All 18,957 judgments and leading authorities on Section 153A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →