P K SHARMA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-17, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers

ITA/803/2018HC DelhiDLHC01143708201826 October 2018Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA2 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal, holding that no substantial question of law arose for consideration. The Court was not inclined to interfere with the ITAT's order. The ITAT had previously remanded the issue of an addition of Rs.21,98,33,603/- to the CIT (Appeals) for fresh adjudication. The High Court's decision implies that it found the ITAT's action of remand to be within its powers and not requiring interference on a substantial question of law. The Court also noted that the Assessee had expired and advised the legal representatives to request the CIT (Appeals) to expedite the proceedings, with the CIT (Appeals) endeavoring to dispose of the matter within three months if such a request was made. No specific issue was left undecided by the High Court.

What were the facts?

The Assessee, P K Sharma, filed an appeal before the High Court of Delhi against an order dated January 9, 2018, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in IT (SS) No.410/Del/2004. This order pertained to the block period April 1, 1987, to May 8, 1997. The core of the dispute involved the ITAT's decision to remand an issue concerning an addition of Rs.21,98,33,603/- to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for fresh adjudication. The Assessee's legal representatives were informed that the Assessee had expired.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the ITAT was justified in remanding the issue concerning the addition of Rs.21,98,33,603/- to the CIT (Appeals) for fresh adjudication? (Question of law/mixed law and fact) Assessee's contention: The Assessee argued that the ITAT's decision to remand the issue was not justified. However, the judgment does not explicitly detail the specific arguments made by the Assessee's counsel beyond this general assertion. Revenue's contention: The Revenue did not present any arguments in the High Court as the appeal was dismissed on the grounds that no substantial question of law arose.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~42 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 803/2018 P K SHARMA ..... Appellant Through: Mr. P. Roy Chaudhuri and Mr. Mohan Kumar Khullar, Advocates. versus ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-17, NEW DELHI ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Senior Standing Counsel. CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA O R D E R % 26.10.2018 1. This appeal by the Assessee is directed against the order dated 9th January, 2018, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bench ‘D’ New Delhi (ITAT) in IT (SS) No.410/Del/2004 for the block period 1st April 1987 to 8th May 1997. 2. The principal question urged for consideration is whether the ITAT was justified in remanding the issue concerning the addition of Rs.21,98,33,603/- to the CIT (Appeals) for fresh adjudication? 3. Having heard learned counsel for the Appellant Assessee, and having

examined the orders in appeal, the Court is not inclined to interfere since, in its considered view, no substantial question of law arises. 4. Nevertheless, it would be open to the legal representatives of the Appellant Assessee, who is stated to have expired, to make a request to the CIT (A) to expedite the proceedings. If such a request is made, the CIT (A) will endeavour to dispose of the matter within three months. 5. The appeal is dismissed with the above observations. S.MURALIDHAR, J. SANJEEV NARULA, J. OCTOBER 26, 2018 nk

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →