THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -9 vs. TIKONA INFINET LTD.

PDF · subscribers
ITA/954/2018HC DelhiDLHC01529414201731 August 2018Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the appeal without answering the issue/question raised, in view of the statement made by the counsel for the Revenue regarding the tax effect being less than Rs.50 lakhs and the applicability of Circular No. 3 of 2018. The Court clarified that this order would not affect the ratio of the decisions relied upon by the respondent-assessee, specifically mentioning Commissioner of Income-Tax Vs. BSES Yamuna Powers Ltd. (2013) 358 ITR 47 (Delhi) concerning depreciation on computer accessories and peripherals. No specific finding was given on the substantive issue of depreciation. The applications for condonation of delay were not issued notice as the appeal was not being decided.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-9 (Revenue) against Tikona Infnet Ltd. (assessee). The assessment year(s) are not explicitly stated. The order or action under challenge is the Revenue's appeal against a decision of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The amount in dispute is stated to be less than Rs.50 lakhs. The procedural history involves the Revenue seeking to dispose of the appeal without answering the issue due to the low tax effect, as per Circular No. 3 of 2018. The assessee's counsel noted that the issue of depreciation on computer accessories and peripherals is covered by existing High Court decisions.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal can be disposed of without answering the issue raised, given the tax effect is less than Rs.50 lakhs, in terms of Circular No. 3 of 2018? (Question of procedure/administrative policy) Assessee's Contentions: - The issue of depreciation on computer accessories and peripherals is covered by several decisions of this court, including Commissioner of Income-Tax Vs. BSES Yamuna Powers Ltd. (2013) 358 ITR 47 (Delhi). Revenue's Contentions: - The tax effect in the present appeal is less than Rs.50 lakhs. - In terms of Circular No. 3 of 2018 dated 11th July, 2018, the appeal may be disposed of without answering the issue/question raised, which may be left open.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~18 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ ITA 954/2018 & C.M. Nos.35429-35430/2018

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -9..... Appellant Through Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Sr. Standing Counsel.

versus

TIKONA INFINET LTD.

..... Respondent Through Mr. Rohit Jain and Mr. Aniket D. Agrawal, Advocates.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR

O R D E R %

31.08.2018

Counsel for the appellant-Revenue states that the tax effect in the present appeal is less than Rs.50 lakhs and hence, in terms of Circular No.3 of 2018 dated 11th July, 2018, the appeal may be disposed of without answering the issue/question raised, which may be left open. Counsel for the respondent-assessee states that the issue of depreciation on computer accessories and peripherals is covered by several decisions of this court including Commissioner of Income-Tax Vs. BSES Yamuna Powers Ltd. (2013) 358 ITR 47 (Delhi). In view of the statement made by the counsel for the Revenue, the appeal is disposed of without answering the issue/question raised. We, however, clarify that this order would not in any way affect the ratio of the decisions relied upon by the respondent-assessee.

As we are not deciding the appeal, we are not issuing notice on the applications seeking condonation of delay in filing and re-filing.

SANJIV KHANNA, J

CHANDER SHEKHAR, J AUGUST 31, 2018 NA

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →