THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S JUPITER AQUA LINE PVT LTD

PDF · subscribers

ITA/386/2019HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01094632201925 February 2020Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI,MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN1 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the present appeal is covered by its previous decision in ITA No. 322 of 2016. The reasoning is based on the admission by the Revenue's counsel that the facts and legal issues are identical to the cited case. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the appeal in the same terms as the earlier judgment. The ratio decidendi is that if an appeal is factually and legally identical to a previously decided case by the same court, it should be disposed of accordingly. The operative direction was to dismiss the appeal.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Chandigarh (the Revenue) against M/s Jupiter Aqua Line Pvt Ltd (the Assessee). The assessment year(s) are not specified in the judgment. The appeal challenges an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), though the specific order and its date are not mentioned. The procedural history is limited to the filing of this appeal before the High Court. The Revenue's counsel conceded that the present appeal is covered by a previous decision of the High Court in a similar case.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is covered by the decision of the High Court in ITA No. 322 of 2016 titled Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Chandigarh vs. M/s Vardhman Chemtech Private Ltd., Chandigarh, decided on 28.08.2018? (Question of law) The Revenue's contention, as presented by its counsel, is that the present appeal is covered by the aforementioned decision of the High Court and therefore, should be dismissed in the same terms. No specific arguments were recorded for the Assessee, other than the implicit acceptance of the Revenue's submission.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

109 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** ITA-386-2019 DECIDED ON:FEBRUARY 25, 2020 THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, CHANDIGARH APPELLANT VERSUS M/S JUPITER AQUA LINE PVT LTD RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN Present: Mr. Tajender K. Joshi, Advocate for Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Sr. Standing Counsel for the appellant. **** AJAY TEWARI, J (Oral): 1. Learned counsel for the appellant has fairly admits that the present appeal is covered against the revenue by the decision of this Court in ITA No. 322 of 2016 titled as Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Chandigarh vs. M/s Vardhman Chemtech Private Ltd., Chandigarh, decided on 28.08.2018 and the same be dismissed in same terms. 2. In the circumstances, the appeal stands dismissed in same terms as in ITA No. 322 of 2016. [AJAY TEWARI] JUDGE [AVNEESH JHINGAN] JUDGE FEBRUARY 25, 2020

sham

Whether speaking/ reasoned : Yes / No 2. Whether reportable : Yes / No SHAM SUNDER 2020.02.26 18:02 I attest to the authenticity and integrity of this document HIGH COURT CHANDIGARH

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →