AMBIENCE DEVELOPERS & INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

ITA/879/2017HC DelhiDLHC01456291201718 December 2017Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES2 pages

AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the appeals were not maintainable in their current form because the assessees had initiated rectification proceedings before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Court reasoned that this procedural step meant the High Court appeals could not proceed as they were. The judgment stated that if the assessees remained aggrieved by the ITAT's order in the rectification proceedings, they would be at liberty to approach the High Court again through appropriate proceedings. All rights and contentions regarding the correctness of the impugned order were reserved for future consideration. No specific issue was decided on merits.

What were the facts?

The appeals were filed by Ambience Hotels & Resorts Pvt Ltd and Ambience Developers & Infrastructure Pvt Ltd against the Commissioner of Income Tax for assessment years not specified. The appeals challenged orders passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). During the pendency of these High Court proceedings, the assessees approached the ITAT under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, seeking rectification of certain grounds. The High Court noted this development.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the present appeals are maintainable in light of the assessees having approached the ITAT for rectification under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Assessee's Contention: Not explicitly recorded, but the filing of rectification applications suggests a belief that further recourse before the ITAT was appropriate. Revenue's Contention: Not explicitly recorded, but the High Court's decision implies that the pendency of rectification proceedings before the ITAT renders the High Court appeals not maintainable at this stage.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 254(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~9«fel0 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 876/2017 AMBIENCE HOTELS & RESORTS PVT LTD Appellant versus COMMISIONER OFINCOME TAX . .....Respondent + ITA 879/2017 AMBIENCE DEVELOPERS & INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD Appellant versus COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX Respondent Present; Ms. Monika Ghai withMs. Shyamalima Borah, Advs. for the appellant. Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing Counsel for Revenue. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. CHAWLA ORDER % 18.12.2017 It is brought to the notice of the Court that the assessees have, during thependency ofthese proceedings, approached the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 seeking rectification on certain grounds. In these circumstances, the appeals are not ITA Nos.876/2017 &879/2017 Page 1 Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Signature Not Verified

maintainable according to the decisions of the Court. In the event, the appellants are aggrieved by the order made by the ITAT in the rectification proceedings and their grievances urged in these appeals subsist, it is open to them to approach this Court in appropriate proceedings. All rights and contentions with respect to the correctness of the impugned order, are reserved. The appeals are disposed of in the above terms. LwJ/^Uh S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J liiT A.K. CHAWLA, J DECEMBER 18, 2017 kks ITA Nos.876/2017 &879/2017 Page2

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →