The Commissioner Of Income Tax Bhopal vs. M/S Shree Vignesh Warehouse And Distributors Pv.T Ltd.

PDF · subscribers
ITA/15/2015HC Madhya Pradesh24 January 2017Bench: HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE2 pages
For Petitioner: Sanjay Lal
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were not tenable. The Court referred to its previous judgments in the cases of co-assessees Dr. Yogiraj Sharma (decided on March 29, 2016) and Shri Gaurav Sharma & Ors. (decided on August 2, 2016). In those cases, similar appeals filed by the Revenue were dismissed. The High Court found no reason to deviate from its earlier decisions and concluded that the grounds and reasons stated in those prior orders were applicable to the present appeal. Therefore, the appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed. No specific issue was left undecided; the appeal was dismissed based on precedent.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, challenging an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The appeal pertains to various assessment years. The High Court noted that the question involved in this appeal had already been answered by it in previous appeals filed by the Revenue against co-assessees, Dr. Yogiraj Sharma and Shri Gaurav Sharma & Ors. These prior appeals were dismissed by the High Court on March 29, 2016, and August 2, 2016, respectively.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeals filed by the Revenue under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, are tenable in light of previous High Court judgments on similar matters concerning co-assessees. The Revenue argued that the present appeal should be considered on its merits. The Revenue did not present any specific arguments beyond the general contention of tenability. The Assessee (implicitly, as the Revenue is the appellant) did not present any arguments as the judgment relies on prior decisions involving co-assessees. The High Court's decision was based on its prior rulings.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

ITA-15-16-18-20-21-26-39-40/2015 24-01-2017 Shri Sanjay Lal, learned counsel for the appellant. Shri Abhijeet Shrivastava, learned counsel for the respondents. This is the appeal filed by the revenue under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act calling in question the tenability of the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for various assessment years. Except for difference in the years of assessment, the question involved in this appeal stands answered by this Court in the appeal filed under Section 260-A by the revenue (Appeal) in the case of coassessee Dr. Yogiraj Sharma in ITA No.52/2015, wherein, similar appeals of the revenue have been rejected by this Court on 29th of March, 2016 and in ITA Nos.29-31-34-36-41-42/2015 & ITA No.43/2015 decided by a common order on 2.8.2016, where the appeals filed by another co-assessees, Shri Gaurav Sharma & Ors. have been rejected. In view of the order already passed in the appeals filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act on 2.8.2016 and on 29.3.2016, we see no reason to make any further indulgence into the matter and for the grounds and reasons already indicated in the orders passed on 2.8.2016 & 29.3.2016, this appeal filed by the revenue fails. With the aforesaid, this appeal stands dismissed. (RAJENDRA MENON) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE (H.P. SINGH) JUDGE

More judgments on Section 260-A

All 2,570 judgments and leading authorities on Section 260-A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →