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

PDF · subscribers
ITA/16/2015HC 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 appeal filed by the revenue under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act was not tenable. The Court found no reason to grant further indulgence as the question involved in this appeal had already been answered by the same Court in previous appeals filed by the revenue concerning co-assessees Dr. Yogiraj Sharma and Shri Gaurav Sharma & Ors. The reasoning for rejecting those appeals, as indicated in the orders dated March 29, 2016, and August 2, 2016, was applied to the present case. The principle is that consistent High Court decisions on identical issues, especially those involving the same revenue appeals and co-assessees, should be followed. The appeal filed by the revenue fails and is dismissed.

What were the facts?

This is an appeal filed by the revenue under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, challenging an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The appeal concerns various assessment years, and the core issue is identical to that decided by the High Court in previous appeals filed by the revenue. Specifically, the High Court had already rejected similar appeals by the revenue in the case of co-assessee Dr. Yogiraj Sharma (ITA No.52/2015) on March 29, 2016, and in the cases of co-assessees Shri Gaurav Sharma & Ors. (ITA Nos.29-31-34-36-41-42/2015 & ITA No.43/2015) by a common order on August 2, 2016. The present appeal raises the same question of law.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is tenable, concerning various assessment years, as challenged by the revenue under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act. Assessee's Contentions: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the assessee. The appeal is disposed of based on prior judgments. Revenue's Contentions: The revenue is challenging the order of the ITAT. The judgment indicates that the revenue had filed appeals in similar matters concerning co-assessees, which were rejected by the High Court. The revenue's argument in this appeal is implicitly that the ITAT's order was incorrect, necessitating an appeal to the High Court.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

ITA-00016-2015 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 →