IDEA CELLULAR LIMITED vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
ITA/959/2018HC DelhiDLHC01231068201802 November 2018Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The Delhi High Court disposed of the appeal based on the consensus between the parties. Both the assessee and the revenue agreed that the issue in the present appeal was covered by the High Court's prior decision in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Idea Cellular Limited (2010 189 TAXMAN 118). Crucially, they also agreed that this prior decision was subject to an appeal pending before the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court's ruling would govern the present case. The Court noted that this approach was consistent with the principles of Sections 158A and 158AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961, even if not strictly applicable. The parties were granted liberty to file an application in the appeal after the Supreme Court's decision, should any difficulty arise. No specific finding on the merits of the issue was made by the High Court.

What were the facts?

The appellant, Idea Cellular Limited, filed an appeal before the Delhi High Court against an order passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax. The assessment year(s) are not specified in the judgment. The parties, through their counsel, stated that the issue in the present appeal is covered by a previous decision of the Delhi High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Idea Cellular Limited (2010 189 TAXMAN 118). They further acknowledged that this prior decision is currently under appeal before the Supreme Court and that the Supreme Court's ruling would be applicable to the present case. The High Court noted that these statements were in consonance with Sections 158A and 158AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961, although not strictly applicable.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the issue raised in the present appeal is covered by the decision in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Idea Cellular Limited, 2010 189 TAXMAN 118 (Delhi)? (Question of law) Assessee's Contention: The assessee's counsel accepted that the issue is covered by the aforementioned Delhi High Court decision. Revenue's Contention: The revenue's counsel also accepted that the issue is covered by the aforementioned Delhi High Court decision and that the outcome would depend on the pending Supreme Court appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 158A,Section 158AA

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~37 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 959/2018 IDEA CELLULAR LIMITED ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv.with Mr. Sayaree Basu Malik and Ms. Mithila Lalit, Advs. versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Ashok K. Manchanda, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Aditya, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI O R D E R % 02.11.2018 Counsel for the parties state that the issue raised in the present appeal is covered by decision in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Idea Cellular Limited, 2010 189 TAXMAN 118 (Delhi). It is also accepted by the counsel for the parties that the said decision is subject matter of an appeal which is pending before the Supreme Court. Counsel for the parties further state that the ruling and decision of the Supreme Court would equally apply to the present appeal. The statement made is in consonance with Section 158A and 158AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961, though these provisions are not strictly

applicable. In case of any difficulty, it will be open to the parties to file application in this appeal after the decision of the Supreme Court. Recording the aforesaid, the appeal is disposed of. SANJIV KHANNA, J ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI, J NOVEMBER 02, 2018/uj

More judgments on Section 158A

All 116 judgments and leading authorities on Section 158A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →