M/S ZTE CORPORATION vs. CIT-II (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) CIVIC CENTRE NEW DELHI & ANR

PDF · subscribers
ITA/366/2016HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01110574201622 February 2017Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL,MR. JUSTICE RAMENDRA JAIN1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted that the learned counsel for the appellant-assessee submitted that he had instructions to withdraw the appeals, as the appellant wished to challenge the order before the Delhi High Court. The learned counsel for the respondents had no objection to this submission. Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the appeals as withdrawn. The court also clarified that it would be open to the appellant to pursue any remedies available to it in accordance with the law. No decision was made on the merits of the case.

What were the facts?

The assessee, M/s ZTE Corporation, filed appeals under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against an order dated 30.05.2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Delhi, under Section 254(1) of the Act. The appeals were filed before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. The appeals were heard along with ITA Nos. 367 to 371 of 2016, as the issue in all these appeals was identical. The amount in dispute and the specific assessment year(s) are not recorded in the judgment.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeals filed by the appellant-assessee should be dismissed as withdrawn, as per the appellant's instructions. The appellant's counsel stated they had instructions to withdraw the appeals as the appellant intended to challenge the order before the Delhi High Court. The revenue's counsel had no objection to this course of action.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A,Section 254(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

ITA No. 366 of 2016 (O&M) Date of decision: 22.02.2017 M/s ZTE Corporation

... Appellant versus CIT-II (International Taxation), New Delhi and another .... Respondents CORAM:HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMENDRA JAIN ---- Present: Mr. Deepak Agrawal, Advocate, Mr. Rohit Gupta, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Inderpreet Singh, Advocate for the respondents. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. J (ORAL) This order shall dispose of ITA Nos. 366 to 371 of 2016 as the learned counsel for the parties agree that the issue in all the appeals is identical. The facts are taken from ITA No. 366 of 2016. 2. This is an appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the 'Act') against the order dated 30.05.2016 passed under Section 254 (1) of the Act by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi. 3. At the outset, learned counsel for the appellant-assessee submitted that he has instructions to withdraw the appeals as the appellant wants to challenge the order before the Delhi High Court. 4. Learned counsel for the respondents has no objection. 5. Accordingly, the appeals are dismissed as withdrawn. However, it shall be open to the appellant to take recourse to the remedies as may be available to it in accordance with law.

(AJAY KUMAR MITTAL)

JUDGE

(RAMENDRA JAIN)

JUDGE 22.02.2017 kv Whether speaking/non-speaking: Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No VERMA KUMUD 2017.02.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and authencity of this document Chandigarh

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →