THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S N.M. MERCHANTILES LIMITED

PDF · subscribers
ITA/459/2019HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01127467201925 April 2022Bench: MR. JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA,MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN1 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the revenue. The dismissal was based on the concession made by the learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant (revenue). The counsel fairly conceded that the issue involved in the instant appeal is covered against the revenue in light of the Division Bench judgment of the High Court in ITA-322-2016, titled 'Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Chandigarh vs. M/s Vardhman Chemtech Private Limited, Chandigarh', decided on August 28, 2018. Therefore, in light of this stand taken by the revenue, the appeal was dismissed. The ratio decidendi is that if the revenue concedes that an issue is covered by a binding precedent, the appeal will be dismissed on that ground. No issue was left undecided.

What were the facts?

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (appellant/revenue) has filed the present appeal against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The respondent is M/s N.M. Mechantiles Limited (assessee). The appeal pertains to the assessment year(s) not specified in the judgment. The specific order or action under challenge is not detailed, but it is an appeal against an ITAT order. The amount in dispute is not stated. The procedural history is that the revenue has filed this appeal before the High Court.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the revenue is to be dismissed in light of a prior Division Bench judgment of this Court? (Question of law). The appellant (revenue) has conceded that the issue involved in the present appeal is covered against the revenue by a Division Bench judgment of this Court in ITA-322-2016 (Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Chandigarh vs. M/s Vardhman Chemtech Private Limited, Chandigarh), decided on August 28, 2018. The respondent (assessee) has not recorded any specific arguments, but the concession by the revenue implies agreement with the applicability of the cited precedent.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

221 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-459-2019 (O&M) Date of decision: 25.04.2022 The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax ....Appellant

Versus M/s N.M. Mechantiles Limited ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN Present : Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Sr. Standing Counsel assisted by Ms. Pridhi Jaswinder Sandhu, Jr. Standing Counsel for the appellant. TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA, J.(ORAL) Ld. Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant has at the very outset fairly conceded that the issue involved in the instant appeal would be covered against the revenue in the light of Division Bench judgment passed by this Court in ITA-322-2016 (titled as 'Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Chandigarh vs. M/s Vardhman Chemtech Private Limited, Chandigarh'), decided on 28th of August, 2018. In light of such stand taken, the instant appeal is dismissed in view of judgment passed in M/s Vardhman Chemtech Private Limited's case (supra). (TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA)

JUDGE April 25, 2022

(PANKAJ JAIN) Dpr

JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No DEEPAK KUMAR 2022.04.28 10:04 I attest to the accuracy of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →