COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II vs. MADHYA PRADESH KSHETRA VITYUT VITRAN CO. LTD.
What did the High Court hold?
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue. The decision was based on the principle laid down by the Delhi High Court in CIT Vs. Delhi Transco Limited, which was upheld by the Supreme Court. Similar judgments from the Karnataka High Court in CIT, Bangalore Vs. Hubli Electric Supply Company Limited and the Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Limited were also considered. The Tribunal found that the question of law raised by the Revenue had already been decided against the Revenue in these cited cases, and the Supreme Court had dismissed the Revenue's SLP in the Delhi Transco Limited case. Therefore, there was no case for interference, and the appeal was dismissed. The specific issue of limitation was not explicitly addressed in the reasoning provided, but the overall dismissal implies that the Revenue's grounds were not accepted in light of the precedents.
What were the facts?
The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax-II (Revenue) against Madhya Pradesh Kshetra Vityut Vitran Co. Ltd. (Assessee). The assessment year(s) are not explicitly stated in the provided text. The appeal challenges an order or action that is not detailed, but the core of the dispute revolves around a question of law. The procedural history is limited to the filing of this appeal by the Revenue.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction to entertain the appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT(A) when the appeal was filed beyond the prescribed period of limitation and without condoning the delay? (Question of law) Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the appeal was maintainable. (Specific arguments not detailed). Revenue's Contention: The Revenue argued that the appeal was not maintainable due to the delay in filing and lack of condonation. (Specific arguments not detailed).
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
ITA-28-2010 ( COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II Vs MADHYA PRADESH KSHETRA VITYUT VITRAN CO. LTD.) 16-09-2016 Shri Sanjay Lal for the appellant. Shri Sapan Usrethe for the respondent. Heard. In view of the principle laid down by the Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) Vs. Delhi Transco Limited, (2016) 380 ITR 398; upheld by the Supreme Court in the SLP No.1387/2016 (CIT Vs. Delhi Transco Limited); and, further judgment of the Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT, Bangalore Vs. Hubli Electric Supply Company Limited, (2016) 237 TAXMAN 7; and, the judgment of the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Limited (2015) 375 ITR 23, we see no case for interference as the question of law raised in this appeal by the revenue has already been decided against the revenue in the judgments referred to hereinabove and the same has been upheld by the Supreme Court, while dismissing the SLP filed by the revenue in the case of Delhi Transco Limited (supra). In view of the above, this appeal stands dismissed. (RAJENDRA MENON) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE (SUBHASH KAKADE) JUDGE aks
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Modern Engineers And Contractors vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St)Andhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- K Madhusudan Reddy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- Sandeep Ranjan Rout vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Gagan Bihari Rout@Gagan Rout vs. State Of OdishaOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Biswanath Rana vs. The Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
