PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -18 vs. MAHARANI OF INDIA

PDF · subscribers
ITA/877/2017HC DelhiDLHC01224265201727 August 2018Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal recorded the statement made by the counsel for the appellant/Revenue that the tax effect in the present appeals, relating to assessment years 2003-2004 to 2007-2008, is below Rs. 50 Lacs. In terms of Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018, the Tribunal accepted that the substantial question of law framed in the appeals need not be answered. Consequently, the appeals were disposed of without answering the substantial question of law, which was left open. No specific finding was given on the merits of the case.

What were the facts?

The appeals were filed by the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -18 (Revenue) against the Maharani of India (Assessee) for assessment years 2003-2004 to 2007-2008. The appeals challenged orders passed by an authority, though the specific authority and the nature of the orders are not detailed. The tax effect in these appeals was stated to be below Rs. 50 Lacs.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the substantial question of law framed in the appeals needs to be answered, considering the tax effect is below Rs. 50 Lacs, as per Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018. Assessee's contention: Not recorded. Revenue's contention: The Revenue, through its counsel, stated that the tax effect in the appeals is below Rs. 50 Lacs. Therefore, in terms of Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018, the substantial question of law framed in the appeals need not be answered, and the appeals may be disposed of.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

3> $-21 to 25 . . ' * the HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + . . ITA 872/2017 + ITA 873/2017 ,+ ITA 874/2017 + ITA 877/2017 arid + ITA 878/2017 - PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -18 ..... Appellant Through Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing Courisel and Mr. Deepak Anand, Jr. Standing Counsel >. \ versus ' • • . ' MAHARANI OF INDIA .....Respondent Through Mr. Rohit Jain and Mr. Aniket D. Agrawal, Advocate , CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR/JUSTICE CHANDER SHEIOIAR ORDER «/o 27.08.2018 Counsel for the appellant/Revenue states that the tax effect in the present appeals relating to assessment year 2003-2004 to 2007- 2008 is below Rs.50 Lacs and hence, in terms of circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018, the substantial question of law framed in the appeals need not be answered and the appeals may be disposed of. Recording the aforesaid statement, the appeals are disposed of without answering the substantial question oflaw which isleft open. SANJIV KHANNA, J ghandeC^ekhar,J AUGUST 27,2018/b Signed By:RAM DATT Signing Date:09.10.2024 15:41 Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →