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

PDF · subscribers
ITA/26/2015HC 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 is not tenable. The Court referred to its previous decisions in the appeals 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 rejected. The High Court found no reason to deviate from its earlier findings and reasoning. Consequently, the present appeal filed by the revenue was dismissed on the same grounds and for the same reasons as indicated in the prior orders. No specific issue was left undecided; the appeal was dismissed outright.

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 for various assessment years. The core issue in this appeal is identical to that decided by the High Court in previous appeals filed by the revenue concerning co-assessees Dr. Yogiraj Sharma and Shri Gaurav Sharma & Ors. The revenue's appeals in those cases were rejected by the High Court on March 29, 2016, and August 2, 2016, respectively. The present appeal involves the same grounds and reasons as those previously adjudicated.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for various assessment years is tenable in law, as per Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The revenue's contention is that the appeal is tenable and seeks to challenge the Tribunal's order. The judgment does not explicitly record the revenue's specific arguments beyond filing the appeal. The assessee's contentions are not recorded in the judgment. The High Court's decision is based on its prior rulings in similar appeals concerning co-assessees.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

ITA-00026-2015 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 →