ANSAL PROPERTIES & INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
ITA/454/2022HC DelhiDLHC01042333202216 November 2022Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The Delhi High Court held that no substantial question of law arose for consideration in the present appeal. This conclusion was based on the fact that the issue on merits was already covered against the appellant by the High Court's own judgment dated October 31, 2012, reported in 354 ITR 180 (Del). The Court acknowledged the appellant's submission that an appeal against this decision was pending before the Supreme Court and that the appellant wished to be bound by the Supreme Court's outcome. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the appeal. However, it clarified that this order would abide by the decision of the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 724/2013 and other connected matters. The ratio decidendi is that if an issue is settled by a High Court's precedent and no new substantial question of law is presented, an appeal can be dismissed, with a caveat to abide by a higher court's decision on a pending appeal concerning the precedent.

What were the facts?

The appellant, Ansal Properties & Infrastructure Ltd., filed an Income Tax Appeal before the Delhi High Court challenging an order dated August 17, 2017, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in ITA No. 5345/Del./2012 for the Assessment Year 2008-09. The appellant admitted that on merits, the issue was covered against it by a previous judgment of the Delhi High Court dated October 31, 2012 (reported in 354 ITR 180 (Del)). However, the appellant stated that an appeal against that decision was pending before the Supreme Court (Civil Appeal No. 724/2013) and sought to be bound by the Supreme Court's eventual judgment. The revenue was represented by the Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax.

What were the issues?

1. Whether a substantial question of law arises for consideration in the present appeal, given that the issue on merits is covered by a prior judgment of this Court. The Assessee (Appellant) contended that while the issue on merits was covered by the Delhi High Court's judgment in 354 ITR 180 (Del), an appeal against that judgment was pending before the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 724/2013. The Assessee sought to be bound by the Supreme Court's decision. The Assessee relied on the pendency of the Supreme Court appeal as a reason for the High Court to defer its decision or consider the matter in light of the apex court's ruling. The Revenue (Respondent) did not record any specific arguments in the judgment regarding the substantial question of law. However, the judgment noted the prior High Court decision which was against the assessee.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~39 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 454/2022 & CM APPLs. 48702-03/2022 ANSAL PROPERTIES & INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Arta Trana Panda, Advocate. versus DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Senior Standing Counsel for Revenue. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA O R D E R % 16.11.2022 CM APPLs. 48702/2022 (for condonation of delay) Keeping in view the averments in the application, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. Accordingly, the present application is disposed of. CM APPLs. 48703/2022 (for exemption) Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Accordingly, the present application stands disposed of. ITA 454/2022 Present Income Tax Appeal has been filed challenging the order dated 17th August, 2017, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (‘ITAT’) in ITA No.5345/Del./2012 for the Assessment Year 2008-09. 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 15/06/2026 at 02:06:13

Learned counsel for the Appellant fairly admits that on merits, the issue is covered against the Appellant vide judgment of this Court dated 31st October, 2012 reported in 354 ITR 180 (Del). He, however, states that the Appellant-Assessee has not accepted the said decision and the appeal against the same being Civil Appeal No.724/2013 is pending adjudication before the Supreme Court. Learned counsel for the Appellant further states that the Appellant seeks to bind itself by the judgment that the Supreme Court would deliver in Civil Appeal No.724/2013 and other connected matters, which are pending disposal. Consequently, keeping in view the judgment of the learned predecessor Division Bench dated 31st October, 2012, reported in 354 ITR 180 (Del), this Court is of the view that no substantial question of law arises for consideration and accordingly, the present appeal is dismissed. However, it is clarified that the present order shall abide by the decision of the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 724/2013 and other connected matters, which are pending disposal. MANMOHAN, J MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J NOVEMBER 16, 2022/msh 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 15/06/2026 at 02:06:13

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →