COMMR.INCOME TAX vs. GAGAN SINGH

PDF · subscribers
ITA/38/2003HC Himachal PradeshHPHC01004933200316 November 2009Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. AHUJA2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the appeal challenging the first order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has become infructuous. The court reasoned that since a fresh assessment was framed pursuant to the CIT(Appeals)'s order, and a subsequent order of the ITAT has attained finality, the original order under challenge is no longer relevant. The assessment of the assessee will be governed by the subsequent order passed by the ITAT. The operative direction is that the appeal is disposed of as infructuous.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed an order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The ITAT had set aside an order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) which had, in turn, remanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment. The assessee had appealed the CIT(A)'s order to the ITAT. It is not disputed that a fresh assessment was framed by the Assessing Officer pursuant to the CIT(A)'s order. The current appeal challenges the first ITAT order. Subsequent proceedings have culminated in a later ITAT order which has attained finality.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal's order setting aside the CIT(Appeals)'s order remanding the matter back to the Assessing Officer is valid, considering that a fresh assessment was subsequently framed and a subsequent ITAT order has attained finality? The Revenue contended that the appeal challenging the first ITAT order has become infructuous. The assessee did not present any specific arguments on this point, but the court noted that the fresh assessment and subsequent ITAT order would govern the proceedings.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

Income-tax Appeal No. 38 of 2003

Date of decision: 16.11.2009

Commissioner of Income-tax

Appellant.

Versus

Gagan Singh Katoch.

Respondent.

Coram The Hon’ble Mr.Justice Deepak Gupta, J. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K.Ahuja, J. Whether approved for reporting? No.

For the appellant: Mr. Vinay Kuthiala and Ms. Vandana Kuthiala, Advocate.

For the respondent:

Mr. M.M.Khanna, Sr. Advocate with Shri

Goverdhan Sharma, Advocate.

Per Deepak Gupta, J.(oral)

By means of this appeal, the Revenue has challenged the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The CIT (Appeals) had set-aside the order of the Assessing Officer and remanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer for framing fresh assessment. This order was challenged in appeal by the Assessee and the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal set-aside the order of the CIT (Appeals). It is not disputed before us that pursuant to the order of the CIT (Appeals) fresh assessment was framed by the Assessing Officer. Thereafter the matter was carried in appeal and these proceedings have now culminated in the subsequent order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. This order has attained finality.

2 Therefore, the first order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal which is under challenge in this appeal has virtually become infructuous. The assessment proceedings shall be governed by the subsequent order passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal.

The appeal in question is disposed of by holding that the proceedings have become infructuous and the assessment of the assessee shall be governed by the subsequent order passed by the ITAT.

( Deepak Gupta ), J.

16th November, 2009

( V.K.Ahuja ), J.

™

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →