THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CHD vs. BATALA IMPROVEMENT TRUST SHASTRI NAGAR BATALA

PDF · subscribers
ITA/45/2017HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01117668201725 January 2018Bench: MR. JUSTICE S.J. VAZIFDAR,MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN1 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the present appeal is covered in favour of the assessee by the Division Bench judgment of the same High Court in The Tribune Trust Vs Commissioner of Income Tax and another and in Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) Vs Improvement Trust, Moga (2017) 390 ITR 547 (P&H). The Court noted that the Revenue has challenged these judgments before the Supreme Court and leave has been granted. Consequently, the appeal was disposed of in terms of the aforesaid High Court judgment. The ratio decidendi is that if a matter is covered by a binding precedent of the same High Court, and the Revenue's challenge to that precedent is pending before the Supreme Court, the High Court will follow its own precedent. No specific issue was left undecided; the appeal was decided based on the established precedent.

What were the facts?

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Chandigarh (Revenue) appealed against an order concerning the Batala Improvement Trust (assessee). The specific assessment year(s) and the order or action under challenge are not detailed in this judgment. The procedural history indicates that the Revenue has challenged a similar judgment before the Supreme Court, where leave has been granted. This appeal is being disposed of based on prior judgments of the Punjab and Haryana High Court.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal is covered in favour of the assessee in view of the judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in The Tribune Trust Vs Commissioner of Income Tax and another and in Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) Vs Improvement Trust, Moga (2017) 390 ITR 547 (P&H)? (Question of law) Assessee's contention: The assessee relies on the Division Bench judgment of the High Court in The Tribune Trust and Improvement Trust, Moga cases, which are stated to cover this appeal in their favour. Revenue's contention: The Revenue acknowledges that this appeal is covered by the aforementioned judgments. However, they have challenged the judgment before the Supreme Court and leave has been granted in those cases. The Revenue does not present any independent arguments for this specific appeal, but rather relies on the fact that the matter is under consideration by the Supreme Court.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

ITA-45-2017 (O&M) Date of decision:- 25.01.2018

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Chandigarh

...Appellant Versus

Batala Improvement Trust ...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.J. VAZIFDAR, CHIEF JUSTICE

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN

Present:- Mr. Denesh Goyal, Advocate,

for the appellant. * * * * S.J. VAZIFDAR, C.J. (ORAL)

It is agreed that this appeal is covered in favour of the assessee in view of the judgement of a Division Bench of this Court to which one of us (S.J. Vazifdar, CJ) was a party in The Tribune Trust Vs Commissioner of Income Tax and another and in Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) Vs Improvement Trust, Moga (2017) 390 ITR 547 (P&H). 2.

We are informed that the revenue has challenged the judgement before the Supreme Court and that leave has been granted in those cases. 3.

The appeal is accordingly disposed of in terms of the aforesaid judgement.

(S.J. VAZIFDAR) CHIEF JUSTICE

(AVNEESH JHINGAN) JUDGE 25.01.2018 Amodh Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No

Amodh Sharma 2018.02.09 16:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →