MS UPS INVERTOR.COM vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers

ITA/84/2018HC Himachal PradeshHPHC01008350201727 August 2018Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KAROL, THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY MOHAN GOEL2 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the issues involved in the present appeal had already been adjudicated by the Court in Civil Appeal No. 7208 of 2018, Commissioner of Income Tax versus Classic Binding Industries. Consequently, applying the directions from that precedent case mutatis mutandis to the present appeal, the High Court disposed of the appeal. The reasoning was that since the issues were identical, the outcome should follow the established precedent. The operative direction was to dispose of the appeal in terms of the prior ruling. No issues were left undecided.

What were the facts?

This appeal was filed by M/s UPS Inverter Com. (the appellant) against an order or action of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (the respondent). The specific assessment year(s) and the nature of the order under challenge are not detailed in the provided text. The appeal was filed with a delay of 16 days, which the High Court condoned upon allowing an interlocutory application. The High Court noted that the issues involved in the present appeal had already been adjudicated by the same Court in a previous case, Civil Appeal No. 7208 of 2018, titled Commissioner of Income Tax versus Classic Binding Industries, decided on August 20, 2018.

What were the issues?

The High Court was not required to decide any new issues as the matter had been previously adjudicated. The core of the judgment is the application of a prior ruling. The court's action was based on the fact that the issues in the present appeal were identical to those decided in Commissioner of Income Tax versus Classic Binding Industries. Therefore, the court applied the directions from that prior decision to the current appeal. No specific arguments from the assessee or the revenue are recorded in relation to the substantive issues of the appeal, as the decision was based on precedent.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA Date of decision: 27.8.2018. M/s UPS Inverter Com. …..Appellant. Versus Principal Commissioner of Income Tax ……Respondent. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Acting Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. Whether approved for reporting ?1

For the appellant: Mr. Rakesh Kumar Thakur, Advocate. For the respondent: Mr. Vinay Kuthiala Sr. Advocate with Ms. Vandana Kuthiala, Advocate. _________________________________________________ Sanjay Karol, Acting Chief Justice (Oral) OMP(M) No. 26/2018.

For the reasons set out in the application, the same is allowed. The delay of 16 days in filing the appeal, which in our considered view, has sufficiently been explained, is condoned. The application stands disposed of.

Undisputedly, issues involved in the present appeal already stand adjudicated by this Court in Civil Appeal No. 7208 of 2018, titled as Commissioner of Income Tax versus Classic Binding Industries decided on 20.8.2018. 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?.

As such, making the directions Commissioner of Income Tax versus Classic Binding Industries in (supra) applicable mutatis mutandis, also to the present appeal, the same is disposed of.

Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of accordingly. (Sanjay Karol ) Acting Chief Justice. August 27, 2018. (Ajay Mohan Goel) (cm Thakur) Judge. 2

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →