CIT, FARIDABAD vs. SURUCHI MARWAH
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court held that no question of law arises for consideration in the present appeal. This decision is based on the fact that the High Court had already dismissed the Revenue's appeal in the case of Chandni Bhuchar (ITA No. 653 of 2009) on January 7, 2010. The ITAT's order in the present appeal was based on its decision in Chandni Bhuchar's case. Therefore, by extension, the High Court found no grounds to entertain the present appeal. The operative direction is that the appeal is dismissed. No issues were expressly left undecided.
What were the facts?
The Revenue is in appeal against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) dated April 15, 2009. The ITAT had upheld the deletion of an addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of a gift received by the assessee, Smt. Suruchi Marwah, from her father. The ITAT's decision was based on its prior ruling in the case of Chandni Bhuchar (ITA No. 1580(Del) 08). The Revenue had also appealed the ITAT's decision in Chandni Bhuchar's case (ITA No. 653 of 2009) before the High Court, which was dismissed on January 7, 2010.
What were the issues?
1. Whether any question of law arises for consideration in the present appeal, given the High Court's prior dismissal of the Revenue's appeal in the identical case of Chandni Bhuchar (ITA No. 653 of 2009) on January 7, 2010. The Revenue contended that the ITAT's order was erroneous. However, the judgment does not explicitly detail the specific arguments made by the Revenue regarding the gift addition. The judgment notes that the Revenue is in appeal aggrieved against the ITAT's order maintaining the deletion of the addition on account of a gift by the father to his daughter, relying on Chandni Bhuchar's case. The Revenue's argument is implicitly that the ITAT erred in following Chandni Bhuchar's case, which itself was appealed by the Revenue and subsequently dismissed by the High Court.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appeal No. 221 of 2010 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 19.7.2010
Commissioner of Income Tax .....Appellant Versus Smt. Suruchi Marwah ….Respondent CORAM: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Hemant Gupta Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mehinder Singh Sullar 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Shri Urvashi Dhugga, Advocate, for the appellant. Hemant Gupta, J. (Oral) The revenue is in appeal aggrieved against the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal on 15.4.2009, whereby the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax deleting the addition on account of gift by father to his daughter, was maintained, relying upon the judgment of the Tribunal ITA No.1580(Del) 08 Chandni Bhuchar’s case. The revenue came in appeal against the judgment rendered by the Tribunal in Chandni Bhuchar’s case i.e. ITA No. 653 of 2009- The Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad v. Chandni Bhuchar. The said appeal was dismissed by this Court on 7.1.2010.
Income Tax Appeal No. 221 of 2010 [2] In view of the orders passed by this Court in Chandni Bhuchar’s case (supra), we do not find that any question of law arises for consideration in the present appeal. Hence, the present appeal is dismissed. [ Hemant Gupta ] Judge [ Mehinder Singh Sullar ] Judge 19-07-2010 ds
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Maa Swarnapai Chemicals (Opc) Private Limited, Cuttack vs. Sales Tax Officer, Cuttack IOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S. Middlex, Puri vs. Commnr. Of State Tax, Banijyakar Bhawan, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Sunadei Indane Gramin Vitrak, Nayagarh vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, Cuttack, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Sunanda Raul vs. The Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes And Goods Nad Services Tax, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Zakir Hussain Ali Khan vs. Additional Commissioner (Appeals), BhubaneswarOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
