THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -4 vs. GOODYEAR INDIA LIMITED

PDF · subscribers

ITA/754/2018HC DelhiDLHC01158521201817 December 2024Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL4 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The Delhi High Court held that the tax effect in all these appeals falls below INR 2 Crores. Consequently, in light of Circular No. 9/2024 dated 17 September 2024, these appeals are not liable to be continued. The Court dismissed all the appeals on the ground of low tax effect. The proposed questions of law, which were the subject matter of these appeals, were expressly kept open to be urged and addressed in an appropriate future case. No decision was made on the merits of the substantive issues raised in the appeals. The operative direction was the dismissal of the appeals.

What were the facts?

These are multiple appeals filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax against various respondents, including Halcrow Consulting India Pvt. Ltd., Goodyear India Limited, Sh. Pradeep Khanna, Indo Rama Systhetic India Ltd., Johnson Matthey India Pvt. Ltd., Karmic Business Specialities Pvt. Ltd., Bycell Telecommunication, and Mala Kalsi. The appeals were filed before the Delhi High Court. The core issue across these appeals pertains to tax effects that fall below INR 2 Crores. The appeals were filed by the revenue against orders passed by lower authorities, the details of which are not specified in the provided text. The procedural history involves the filing of these appeals by the revenue.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeals, involving a tax effect below INR 2 Crores, are maintainable in light of the prevailing tax litigation policy and circulars issued by the government? (Question of law, implicitly concerning the applicability of Circular No. 9/2024). Assessee's Contentions: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the respondents (assessees) on the merits of the cases. The decision is based on a procedural ground related to tax effect. Revenue's Contentions: The revenue, through its counsel, is implicitly seeking to pursue these appeals. However, the judgment does not record any specific arguments presented by the revenue regarding the merits of the cases or in opposition to the dismissal on grounds of low tax effect. The revenue's presence is noted through the appearance of Standing Counsel and Junior Standing Counsel.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~91 to 100 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 720/2018

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4.....Appellant Through: Mr. Gaurav Gupta, SSC with Mr. Shivendra Singh and Mr. Yojit Pareek, JSCs

versus

HALCROW CONSULTING INDIA PVT. LTD......Respondent Through: Mr. Salil Kapoor, Ms. Ananya Kapoor and Mr. Utkarsha Kumar Gupta, Advs. 92 + ITA 754/2018

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4.....Appellant Through: Mr. Indruj Singh Rai, SSC with Mr. Sanjeev Menon, JSC with Mr. Anmol Jagga, Adv.

versus

GOODYEAR INDIA LIMITED

.....Respondent Through: Mr. Neeraj Jain, Mr. Aniket D. Agrawal and Mr. Aniket D. Agrawal and Mr. Abhisek Singhvi, Advs. 93 + ITA 762/2018

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI - 2 .....Appellant

Through: Appearance not given.

versus

SH. PRADEEP KHANNA

.....Respondent

Through: Appearance not given.

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/12/2024 at 12:49:52

94 + ITA 780/2018

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4.....Appellant Through: Mr. Debesh Panda, Standing Counsel with Ms. Zehra Khan and Mr. Vikramaditya Singh, Advs.

versus

INDO RAMA SYSTHETIC INDIA LTD. .....Respondent

Through: Appearance not given. 95 + ITA 808/2018

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5.....Appellant

Through: Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, SSC.

versus

JOHNSON MATTHEY INDIA PVT.LTD......Respondent

Through: Mr. Sumit Mangal and Ms. Radhika Sharma, Advs. 96 + ITA 814/2018

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5.....Appellant

Through: Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, SSC.

versus

JOHNSON MATTHEY INDIA PVT.LTD. .....Respondent

Through: Mr. Sumit Mangal and Ms. Radhika Sharma, Advs. 97 + ITA 826/2018

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5.....Appellant

Through: Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, SSC.

versus This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/12/2024 at 12:49:52

JOHNSON MATTHEY INDIA PVT.LTD. .....Respondent

Through: Mr. Sumit Mangal and Ms. Radhika Sharma, Advs. 98 + ITA 833/2018

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5.....Appellant

Through: Appearance not given.

versus

KARMIC BUSINESS SPECIALITIES PVT. LTD.

.....Respondent

Through: Appearance not given. 99 + ITA 850/2018

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5 .....Appellant

Through: Appearance not given.

versus

BYCELL TELECOMMUNICATION .....Respondent

Through: Appearance not given. 100 + ITA 866/2018

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 2.....Appellant

Through: Appearance not given.

versus

MALA KALSI,

.....Respondent

Through: Appearance not given.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DHARMESH SHARMA

17.12.2024 O R D E R

Undisputedly, the tax effect which forms the subject matter of these appeals falls below INR 2 Crores and would thus not be liable to be continued in light of the provisions made in Circular No. 9/2024 dated 17 September 2024. 2. The appeals are, consequently, dismissed on the ground of low tax effect. The proposed questions of law are kept open to be urged and addressed in an appropriate case.

YASHWANT VARMA, J

DHARMESH SHARMA, J DECEMBER 17, 2024/RW This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/12/2024 at 12:49:52

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →