THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -2 vs. HDFC BANK LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITXA/328/2012HC Bombay23 July 2014Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE B.P. COLABAWALLA1 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal held that the appeal did not raise any substantial question of law. This finding was based on the reasoning that the substantial question of law framed in this appeal was identical to that in Income Tax Appeal No. 330 of 2012, which had already been decided by the same bench. Consequently, for the reasons stated in the judgment for Income Tax Appeal No. 330 of 2012, this appeal was also found to be devoid of a substantial question of law. The ratio decidendi is that if an appeal presents an identical substantial question of law to one already decided and found not to be substantial, then the subsequent appeal will also be dismissed on the same grounds. The operative direction was to dismiss the appeal.

What were the facts?

This matter concerns Income Tax Appeal No. 328 of 2012 filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Mumbai (the Appellant/Revenue) against HDFC Bank Ltd. (the Respondent/Assessee). The appeal challenges an order or action that is not explicitly detailed in this judgment. The procedural history indicates that the substantial question of law framed in this appeal is identical to question 'A' in Income Tax Appeal No. 330 of 2012, which was decided concurrently. The judgment does not specify the assessment year(s) or the amount in dispute.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal raises a substantial question of law. The Tribunal had to decide if the appeal presented a substantial question of law. The Assessee argued that the appeal did not raise a substantial question of law. The Revenue's contentions are not recorded in this judgment. The issue hinges on the interpretation of what constitutes a 'substantial question of law' in the context of income tax appeals.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

vrd 1 ITXA328/12 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.328 OF 2012 Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Mumbai 400 020 ...Appellant v/s HDFC Bank Ltd. ...Respondent Mr Suresh Kumar for the Appellant. Mr J.D. Mistry, Sr. Counsel with Mr Atul Jasani for the Respondent. CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI AND B.P. COLABAWALLA JJ.

Reserved on : 10th July 2014. Pronounced on : 23rd July 2014. JUDGMENT [ Per B.P. Colabawalla J. ] :- 1. It is common ground before us that the substantial question of law framed in this Appeal is identical to question “A” in Income Tax Appeal No.330 of 2012, which has been decided by us today. In view of our judgment in Income Tax Appeal No.330 of 2012 and for the reasons stated therein, we are of the view that even this Appeal does not raise any substantial question of law. In view thereof, the Appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs. ( B.P. COLABAWALLA J. ) (S.C. DHARMADHIKARI J. ) CNR No : HCBM020044462012 Uploaded on - 21/08/2020 Downloaded on - 28/10/2026 04:19:39 Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →