COMMR.INCOME TAX vs. GAGAN SINGH

PDF · subscribers

ITA/39/2003HC Himachal PradeshHPHC01004931200316 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 filed by the Revenue had become infructuous. The reasoning was that the order of the CIT(Appeals) which was challenged before the ITAT, had led to a fresh assessment being framed by the Assessing Officer. Subsequently, further proceedings culminated in a later order of the ITAT which had attained finality. Therefore, the present appeal, challenging an earlier ITAT order, was rendered moot. The High Court directed that the assessment of the assessee shall be governed by the subsequent order passed by the ITAT. No specific issue was left undecided; the appeal was disposed of on procedural grounds.

What were the facts?

The Revenue (Commissioner of Income-tax) appealed against 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 previously remanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment. The assessee, Gagan Singh Katoch, had challenged the CIT(A)'s order before the ITAT. It was not disputed that a fresh assessment was framed by the Assessing Officer pursuant to the CIT(A)'s order. The current appeal before the High Court challenges the ITAT's earlier order, but subsequent proceedings have resulted in a later ITAT order that has attained finality.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue against the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has become infructuous. The Revenue argued that the appeal was valid. The Assessee argued that the appeal had become infructuous due to subsequent events. The core issue is whether the High Court should decide on the merits of the ITAT's order when subsequent events have rendered it moot.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

Income-tax Appeal No. 39 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 →