THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, PANCHKUL vs. M/S R.B.L. BANARASI DASS & CO.(P) LTD.

PDF · subscribers
ITA/85/2002HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01003109200203 August 2007Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL,MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR1 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the instant appeal. The court noted that the question raised in the appeal emerged from a common order passed by the ITAT for the assessment year 1991-92, which was the subject of the challenge. The court also observed that a similar order for the assessment year 1990-91, concerning the same assessee and arising from a common ITAT order, had been challenged in ITA No. 122 of 2002. A Division Bench of the High Court had dismissed that appeal on 03.10.2002. Therefore, by adopting the view taken by the Division Bench in the earlier case (ITA No. 122 of 2002), the present appeal was also dismissed. No specific issue was decided on merits, and the operative direction was dismissal of the appeal.

What were the facts?

The appeal before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh concerns the Commissioner of Income-tax, Panchkula (the Revenue) versus M/s R.B.L. Banarasi Dass and Co. (P) Ltd. (the Assessee). The assessment year in question is 1991-92. The appeal challenges a common order dated 25.10.2001 passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Chandigarh Bench 'B', in ITA No. 939/Chandi/1993. This order pertains to the same assessee and assessment year. A similar order for assessment year 1990-91 (ITA No. 2088/Chandi/1992) was also challenged in ITA No. 122 of 2002 before the same High Court, which was dismissed on 03.10.2002. The present appeal was therefore dismissed by adopting the view taken in the earlier dismissed appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should decide the appeal on merits, given that a similar appeal for a different assessment year concerning the same assessee and arising from a common ITAT order was dismissed by a Division Bench of the High Court. Assessee's contentions: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the assessee. The High Court's decision appears to be based on precedent from a prior, similar case. Revenue's contentions: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the Revenue. The Revenue is the appellant in this case, seeking to challenge the ITAT's order. However, the court dismissed the appeal without delving into the merits of the ITAT's decision, relying on a previous judgment.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No. 85 of 2002 Date of decision: 03.08.2007 The Commissioner of Income-tax, Panchkula .... Appellant Versus M/s R.B.L. Banarasi Dass and Co. (P) Ltd., Ambala Cantt. .....Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.M.Kumar Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Kumar Mittal Present: Mr. Yogesh Putney, Advocate, for the appellant. *** M.M. Kumar, J. It is not disputed that the question raised in the instant appeal emerges from a common order dated 25.10.2001 passed by the Income- tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench `B' Chandigarh in ITA No. 939/Chandi/1993 in respect of the assessment year 1991-92 which is subject matter of challenge in this appeal. This common order was also passed in ITA No. 2088/Chandi/1992 dated 25.10.2001 in respect of the same assessee for the assessment year 1990-91. This order was challenged in ITA No.122 of 2002 and a Division Bench of this Court dismissed the appeal on 3-10-2002. Therefore, we dismiss the instant appeal also by adopting the view taken by the Division Bench in ITA No.122 of 2002. ( M.M.KUMAR ) JUDGE ( AJAY KUMAR MITTAL ) August 03, 2007 JUDGE pj

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →