PCIT-1, NEW DELHI vs. M/S COUNTRYWIDE PROMOTERS PVT. LTD.

PDF · subscribers
ITA/149/2022HC DelhiDLHC01018186202213 February 2024Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the ITAT was justified in permitting the assessee to raise a jurisdictional challenge as an additional ground. Such a challenge goes to the root of the assessment and can be canvassed before the Tribunal.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed a High Court order concerning an ITAT judgment. The appeal questioned the ITAT's decision to allow the assessee to raise an additional ground regarding a jurisdictional challenge to the invocation of Section 153C of the Income Tax Act.

What were the issues?

Whether the ITAT was justified in allowing the assessee to raise an additional ground challenging the invocation of Section 153C, which pertains to a jurisdictional issue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 153C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~23 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 149/2022

PCIT-1, NEW DELHI

..... Appellant Through: Mr. Abhishek Maratha, SSC with Mr. Parth Semwal, Ms. Nupur Sharma, Advs.

versus

M/S COUNTRYWIDE PROMOTERS PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Piyush Kaushik, Mr. Tanveer Zaki, Advs. Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Sr. SC with Mr. Shivendra Singh, Mr.Puneet, Ms. Mahima, Ms. Deepika, Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV

O R D E R %

13.02.2024 1. The appellant in the instant appeal questions the view expressed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [“ITAT”] in the impugned judgment dated 14 February 2020. The questions of law which are proposed for our consideration are the following: - “a. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case Hon'ble ITAT was legally justified in accepting the additional ground raised by assessee/considering that the same ground was not raised before A.O. or CIT(A)? b. Whether the Hon'ble ITAT was legally justified in not discussing the additions made by A.O. on the basis of seized documents? c. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case Hon'ble ITAT was legally justified in not appreciating the fact that on the same issue the department has filed an SLP in the case of Raj Buildworth Pvt Ltd?” 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 17/12/2024 at 15:43:37

2.

However, what has been canvassed for our consideration by Mr. Maratha, learned counsel for the appellant, was the validity of the action of the ITAT in permitting the assessee to raise a jurisdictional challenge to the invocation of Section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act”]. 3. We note that nothing precludes the ITAT from permitting the raising of an additional ground which would strike at the root of the assessment exercise. Once a jurisdictional question stood raised, it was always open for the ITAT to permit the same being canvassed before it. 4. In view of the aforesaid, we find no error in the view as taken by the ITAT. We find that the appeal raises no substantial question of law. Consequently, it shall stand dismissed.

YASHWANT VARMA, J.

PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J. FEBRUARY 13, 2024/neha

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 17/12/2024 at 15:43:37

More judgments on Section 153C

All 9,619 judgments and leading authorities on Section 153C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →