GURINDERJIT SINGH vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ANR

PDF · subscribers
ITA/330/2019HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01009924201930 October 2019Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI,MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court decided to dispose of the appeals without going into their merits. The reasoning was based on the fact that the assessee had filed miscellaneous applications before the ITAT, arguments had been heard on these applications, and yet no orders had been passed for almost three months. In these circumstances, the Court deemed it appropriate to dispose of the appeals at that stage. The operative direction was a request to the ITAT to make an endeavor to decide the pending miscellaneous applications expeditiously. The High Court did not decide the substantive issues of the appeals.

What were the facts?

The appeals were filed by the Assessees, Gurinderjit Singh and Kesar Singh, under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appeals challenged the order dated 29.08.2018 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Division Bench A, Chandigarh. The ITAT's order was in relation to Cross Objection Nos. 66 to 69/Chd./2017 for Assessment Years 1994-95 to 1997-98. The High Court noted that the appeals were filed after a delay, which was condoned. The primary contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellants, apart from the merits of the case, was that miscellaneous applications filed by the assessee against the impugned ITAT order had not been decided despite arguments being heard almost three months prior.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should decide the appeals on merits, or dispose of them without going into the merits, given the pending miscellaneous applications before the ITAT? (Question of procedure/mixed law and fact) Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that miscellaneous applications filed before the ITAT, on which arguments were heard, remained undecided for approximately three months. This procedural delay warranted consideration by the High Court. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contention from the revenue regarding the pending miscellaneous applications or the High Court's approach to the appeals.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -.-

Date of decision: 30.10.2019 1. ITA No. 330 of 2019 (O&M) Gurinderjit Singh .....Appellant

Vs. PR. Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr. ...Respondents 2. ITA No. 315 of 2019 (O&M) Kesar Singh .....Appellant

Vs. PR. Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr. ...Respondents 3. ITA No. 316 of 2019 (O&M) Kesar Singh .....Appellant

Vs. PR. Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr. ...Respondents 4. ITA No. 317 of 2019 (O&M) Kesar Singh .....Appellant

Vs. PR. Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr. ...Respondents 5. ITA No. 325 of 2019 (O&M) Gurinderjit Singh .....Appellant

Vs. PR. Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr. ...Respondents 6. ITA No. 327 of 2019 (O&M) Gurinderjit Singh .....Appellant

Vs. PR. Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr. ...Respondents TRIPTI SAINI 2019.11.08 10:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

ITA No. 330 of 2019 (O&M) & connected cases -2- 7. ITA No. 329 of 2019 (O&M) Kesar Singh .....Appellant

Vs. PR. Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr. ...Respondents 8. ITA No. 345 of 2019 (O&M) Kesar Singh .....Appellant

Vs. PR. Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr. ...Respondents 9. ITA No. 390 of 2019 (O&M) Gurinderjit Singh .....Appellant

Vs. PR. Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr. ...Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN Present:- Mr. Salil Kapoor, Advocate, and Mr. Shivansh Pandya, Advocate, for the appellant(s). .... AJAY TEWARI, J. (Oral) C.M No. 15342-CII of 2019 in ITA No. 330 of 2019 For the reasons mentioned in the application, delay of 47 days in filing the appeal is condoned. Application stands disposed of. TRIPTI SAINI 2019.11.08 10:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

ITA No. 330 of 2019 (O&M) & connected cases -3- C.M No. 14977-CII of 2019 in ITA No. 315 of 2019 C.M No. 14978-CII of 2019 in ITA No. 316 of 2019 C.M No. 16018-CII of 2019 in ITA No. 345 of 2019 For the reasons mentioned in the applications, delay of 89 days in filing the appeals is condoned. Applications stand disposed of. C.M No. 15004-CII of 2019 in ITA No. 317 of 2019 For the reasons mentioned in the application, delay of 56 days in filing the appeal is condoned. Application stands disposed of. C.M No. 15136-CII of 2019 in ITA No. 325 of 2019 C.M No. 15138-CII of 2019 in ITA No. 327 of 2019 For the reasons mentioned in the application, delay of 48 days in filing the appeal is condoned. Application stands disposed of. C.M No. 15337-CII of 2019 in ITA No. 329 of 2019 For the reasons mentioned in the application, delay of 55 days in filing the appeal is condoned. Application stands disposed of. C.M No. 17848-CII of 2019 in ITA No. 390 of 2019 For the reasons mentioned in the application, delay of 58 days in filing the appeal is condoned. Application stands disposed of. Main Appeals This order shall dispose above-numbered appeals preferred by the the Assesses under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”) against order dated 29.08.2018 (Annexure A-10) passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Division Bench A, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as “the TRIPTI SAINI 2019.11.08 10:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

ITA No. 330 of 2019 (O&M) & connected cases -4- Tribunal”) in Cross Objection Nos.66 to 69/Chd./2017 for Assessment Year 19994-95 to 1997-98. Above-mentioned appeals have been filed against orders of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh, upholding the assessment. Apart from the merits, learned counsel has raised the issue that against the impugned order assessee had filed miscellaneous applications and despite the fact that arguments were heard on 07.08.2019, no orders have been passed thereon as almost three months have been lapsed. In these circumstances, we deem it appropriate to dispose of above- numbered appeals at this stage, without going into the merits and with a request to the Tribunal to make an endeavor to decide miscellaneous applications expeditiously. (AJAY TEWARI) JUDGE October 30, 2019

(ALKA SARIN) tripti JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No TRIPTI SAINI 2019.11.08 10:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →