THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL LUDHIANA vs. M/S SEL TEXTILES LIMITED

PDF · subscribers
ITA/92/2021HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01011020202121 January 2025Bench: MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI,MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court decided that the appeal filed by the Revenue was squarely covered by the Supreme Court's decision in South Indian Bank Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax (2021) 438 ITR 1 (SC). The reasoning was based on the concession made by the Revenue's counsel, who, after reviewing the matter, submitted that the appeal should be disposed of in terms of the Supreme Court's ruling. Consequently, the High Court ordered accordingly. The ratio decidendi is that if a matter is demonstrably covered by a binding precedent from the Supreme Court, the High Court should follow that precedent and dispose of the appeal accordingly, especially when the Revenue concedes to such a course of action. The operative direction was to dispose of the appeal in terms of the Supreme Court's decision. No issues were expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

This case involves an appeal filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ludhiana (the Revenue) against M/s SEL Textiles Limited (the Assessee). The assessment years are not explicitly stated in the provided text. The appeal challenges an order or action, the specifics of which are not detailed. The procedural history indicates that on January 16, 2025, the High Court was informed by the Assessee's counsel that the matter was covered by the Supreme Court's decision in South Indian Bank Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax. The Revenue sought accommodation to examine this. On January 21, 2025, the Revenue's counsel, on instructions, conceded that the matter was indeed covered by the aforementioned Supreme Court decision and requested the appeal be disposed of accordingly.

What were the issues?

The primary issue before the High Court was whether the appeal filed by the Revenue was maintainable or liable to be dismissed based on a Supreme Court precedent. The questions of law or mixed law and fact are not explicitly framed as numbered questions in the judgment. However, the core issue revolves around the applicability of the Supreme Court's decision in South Indian Bank Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax to the present case. The Assessee contended that the matter is squarely covered by this Supreme Court judgment and therefore the appeal should be dismissed. The Revenue, after initially seeking time to examine the matter, ultimately conceded, on instructions, that the matter is indeed covered by the Supreme Court's decision in South Indian Bank Ltd. (supra) and agreed to its disposal in the same terms.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

ITA-92-2021 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-92-2021 (O&M) Date of decision: 21.01.2025 The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ludhiana …. Appellant Vs. M/s SEL Textiles Limited …. Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA Present: Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Senior Standing counsel with Ms. Muskaan Gupta, Advocate, for the appellants. Ms. Radhika Suri, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Abhinav Narang, Advocate, Ms. Parnika Singla, Advocate and Mr. Raj Sumer Singh, Advocate for the respondent. ARUN PALLI, J (Oral) On January 16, 2025, this Court had passed the following order: “At the outset, learned Senior counsel for the respondent submits that the matter at hand is squarely covered by the decision of the Supreme Court, rendered in South Indian Bank Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, (2021) 438 ITR 1 (SC), and that the appeal is liable to be dismissed in terms thereof. In response, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant prays for a short accommodation to examine the matter. As prayed, adjourned to 21.01.2025. To be taken up immediately after the urgents.” Today, learned counsel for the Revenue, on instructions, submits that the matter at hand is squarely covered by the decision of DEEPAK KUMAR 2025.01.22 10:49 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document P & H High Court, Chandigarh

ITA-92-2021 2

Supreme Court, rendered in South Indian Bank Ltd. (supra), and the same be disposed of in the same terms. Ordered accordingly. (ARUN PALLI) JUDGE (SUDEEPTI SHARMA) JUDGE 21.01.2025 deepak Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No DEEPAK KUMAR 2025.01.22 10:49 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document P & H High Court, Chandigarh

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →