THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-XVII vs. DPS, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA/780/2009HC DelhiDLHC01178611200831 October 2011Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES1 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The provided text is a procedural order and does not contain any findings or decisions by the High Court on the merits of the appeals. It does not record what the Tribunal decided, the reasoning behind any decision, or the ratio decidendi. Consequently, there are no operative directions, no relief granted, and no issues left undecided that can be reported. The judgment is silent on all substantive aspects of the case.

What were the facts?

The appeals before the High Court of Delhi involve the Commissioner of Income Tax (Revenue) as the appellant and Delhi Public School (Assessee) as the respondent. The assessment years are not explicitly stated in the provided text. The appeals challenge orders passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The procedural history indicates that these are appeals filed by the Revenue against the ITAT's decisions. The specific amounts in dispute are not mentioned. The judgment is dated October 31, 2011, and was reserved on September 21, 2011. The provided text is a procedural order and does not contain the substantive facts of the case.

What were the issues?

The provided text is a procedural order and does not contain the specific issues that the High Court had to decide, nor does it record the arguments of the assessee or the revenue. Therefore, it is not possible to identify the questions of law or mixed law and fact, the relevant provisions of the Income Tax Act, or the authorities, circulars, or precedents relied upon by either side. The judgment is silent on these aspects.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Reserved on: 21st September, 2011 %

Date of decision: 31st October, 2011

+ ITA NO.345/2009, ITA NO.414/2009, ITA NO.458/2009, ITA NO.780/2009 & ITA NO.787/2009

All titled as: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

…..Appellant Through: Ms. Rashmi Chopra, Advocate.

-versus-

DELHI PUBLIC SCHOOL

.....Respondent Through: Mr. Ajay Vohra, Advocate with Ms. Kavita Jha, Advocate and Mr. Somnath Shukla, Advocate.

CORAM:

HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL

1.

Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? No.

2.

To be referred to the Reporter or not? No. 3. Whether the Judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes.

SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J.

For orders see ITA No.345/2009.

SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J.

ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE OCTOBER 31, 2011 mk

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →