PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL-2) vs. G.S FINANCE AND INVESTMENT PVT. LTD.,

PDF · subscribers
ITA/867/2015HC DelhiDLHC01429589201517 November 2015Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Delhi, in view of its order dated 28th July, 2015, in ITA No. 509/2015 (Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central-II) v. Aakash Arogya Mandir Pvt. Ltd.), held that no substantial question of law arises in the present appeals. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed. The reasoning is based on the precedent set in the cited case, implying that the facts and legal issues in the present appeals are similar to those in the Aakash Arogya Mandir Pvt. Ltd. case, where it was also determined that no substantial question of law was involved. The ratio decidendi is that appeals under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, are maintainable only if they involve a substantial question of law, and if such a question is absent, the appeals are liable to be dismissed.

What were the facts?

The appeals, ITA Nos. 866/2015 and 867/2015, were filed by the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central-2) against the respondent, G.S. Finance and Investment Pvt. Ltd. The appeals challenged an order or action that is not specified in the provided text. The procedural history indicates that applications for exemption and condonation of delay in re-filing the appeals were filed and disposed of. The appeals were filed before the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi.

What were the issues?

The High Court of Delhi was to decide if a substantial question of law arises from the orders under appeal. The appellant, Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central-2), contended that substantial questions of law do arise. The respondent, G.S. Finance and Investment Pvt. Ltd., likely argued that no substantial question of law arises, or that the appeals should be dismissed on other grounds. The judgment does not explicitly detail the arguments of each side beyond the court's observation regarding the substantial question of law. The core issue revolves around whether the appeals present a question of law that warrants consideration by the High Court, potentially under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which governs appeals to the High Court.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 22. + ITA 866/2015 PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL-2) Appellant Through; Ms. Suruchi Aggarwal, Senior Standing counsel with Ms. Lakshmi Gurung, Mr. Abhishek Sharma, Ms. Radhika Gupta and Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocates. versus G.S. FINANCE AND INVESTMENT PVT. LTD Respondent AND 23. / +c/ ITA 867/2015 PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL-2) Appellant Through: Ms. Suruchi Aggarwal, Senior Standing counsel with Ms. Lakshmi Gurung, Mr. Abhishek Sharma, Ms. Radhika Gupta and Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocates. versus G.S. FINANCE AND INVESTMENT PVT. LTD Respondent CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU ORDER % 17.11.2015 CM No.26989 of 2015 (for exemption) in ITA 866/2015 ITA Nos. 866/2015 & 867/2015 Page 1 of2 Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Signature Not Verified

CM No.26991 of 2015 (for exemption^ in ITA 867/2015 1. Exemptions allowed subject to all justexceptions. 2. The applications are disposed of. CM No.26900 of 2015 (for condonation of delay in re-filing the appeaH in ITA 866/2015 CM No.26992 of 2015 (for condonation of delay in re-filing the appeal) in ITA 867/2015 3. For the reasons stated in the applications, the delays in re-filing the respective appeals are condoned. 4. The applications stand disposed of. ITA Nos. 866/2015 & 867/2015 5. Inview ofthe order dated 28^ July, 2015 passed by this Court in ITA No. 509/2015 (Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central-II) v. Aakash Arogya Mandir Pvt. Ltd.), no substantial question of law arises. The present appeals are dismissed. S.MURALIDHAR,J VIBHUBAKIIRU,J NOVEMBER 17,2015 dn ITA Nos. 866/2015 & 867/2015 Page 2 of2

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →