COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GURGAON vs. MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED

PDF · subscribers
ITA/333/2019HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01079161201904 August 2022Bench: MR. JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA,MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the issue raised in the instant appeal had already been dealt with by a Coordinate Bench of the Court. The Revenue's counsel made a statement to this effect, referencing specific prior judgments (ITA-361-2019, ITA-362-2019, and ITA-324-2019) decided on December 16, 2019. In light of this statement, the High Court dismissed the instant appeal. The reasoning for dismissal was based on the principle of judicial precedent, where a matter already decided by a coordinate bench is applied to avoid re-litigation and ensure consistency. The operative direction was the dismissal of the appeal. No specific issues were left undecided; rather, the appeal itself was disposed of based on the prior adjudication.

What were the facts?

The appeal is filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Gurgaon (Revenue) under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against an order dated 24.08.2018 passed by the Income Tax Tribunal, Delhi Bench. The order pertains to assessment year 2004-05 and concerns Motorola Solutions India Pvt. Ltd. (Assessee). The Revenue's counsel stated that the issue in this appeal has already been decided by a Coordinate Bench of the High Court on an even date, specifically December 16, 2019, in related appeals involving the same assessee and Revenue. These related appeals were ITA-361-2019, ITA-362-2019, and ITA-324-2019.

What were the issues?

The High Court was to decide the appeal filed by the Revenue against the Income Tax Tribunal's order. The primary issue, as indicated by the Revenue's submission, was whether the issue raised in the instant appeal had already been adjudicated by a Coordinate Bench of the High Court. The Revenue contended that the issue in the present appeal stands dealt with by a Coordinate Bench of the High Court in judgments dated 16.12.2019 in ITA-361-2019, ITA-362-2019, and ITA-324-2019. The judgment does not record any specific arguments from the Assessee's side regarding the merits of the case, but rather focuses on the procedural aspect of the appeal being covered by prior judgments.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-333-2019 (O&M) Date of Decision:04.08.2022 Commissioner of Income Tax, Gurgaon ... Appellant Versus Motorola Solutions India Pvt. Ltd. ... Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN. Present: Mr. T.K. Joshi, Sr. Standing counsel with Mr. Vikram Bali, Jr. Standing counsel for the appellant. ... TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA, J. (ORAL). Instant appeal has been filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order dated 24.08.2018 passed by the Income Tax Tribunal, Delhi Bench in ITA-4643/DEL/2011 pertaining to the assessment year 2004-05. Mr. T.K. Joshi, learned senior standing counsel at the very outset makes a statement that the issue raised in the instant appeal already stands dealt with by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide judgments carrying even date i.e. 16.12.2019 in ITA-361-2019 (Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Gurgaon Vs. M/s Motorola Solutions India Pvt. Ltd.), ITA-362-2019 (The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Gurgaon Vs. M/s Motorola India Pvt. Ltd.) as also ITA-324-2019 (The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Gurgaon Vs. M/s Motorola India Pvt. Ltd.). HARJEET KAUR 2022.08.05 15:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

ITA-333-2019 (O&M) -2- In the light of such statement, the instant appeal is dismissed in terms of judgment dated 16.12.2019 in ITA-361-2019. (TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA) JUDGE (PANKAJ JAIN) JUDGE 04.08.2022 harjeet i) Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No ii) Whether reportable? Yes/No HARJEET KAUR 2022.08.05 15:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

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 →