PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-7, DELHI vs. M/S PILOT INDUSTRIES LTD.

PDF · subscribers
ITA/576/2023HC DelhiDLHC01040851202319 October 2023Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted the significant delay in filing the appeal. Since the issues were covered by a coordinate bench's decision in the assessee's own case, the court did not proceed to hear the appeal on merits.

What were the facts?

The revenue filed an appeal against an ITAT order for AY 2010-11 with a significant delay. The revenue's counsel informed the court that the proposed questions of law were covered by a previous judgment concerning the same assessee for earlier assessment years.

What were the issues?

Whether the proposed questions of law raised by the revenue are covered by a previous judgment of a coordinate bench in the assessee's own case.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cited by 62 judgments on BharatTax

See all citing judgments →

Counted from the text of the judgments hosted here. Most recent first.

ITA 576/2023

Page 1 of 2

$~2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI %

Decision delivered on: 19.10.2023 + ITA 576/2023

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-7, DELHI ..... Appellant

Through: Mr Sunil Agarwal, Sr. Standing

Counsel with Mr Shivansh B. Pandya,

Jr. Standing Counsel and Mr Utkarsh

Tiwari, Adv.

versus

M/S PILOT INDUSTRIES LTD.

..... Respondent

Through: None.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA [Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)]

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J. (ORAL):

CM APPL. 53009/2023 1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions. ITA 576/2023 & CM APPL. 53007/2023 & 53008/2023 [Applications filed on behalf of the appellant seeking condonation of delay of 354 (in CM No. 53007/2023) days in filing the appeal and delay of 47 days (in CM No. 53008/2023) in re-filing the appeal]. 2. This appeal concerns Assessment Year (AY) 2010-11. 3. Via this appeal, the appellant/revenue seeks to assail the order dated 23.11.2021 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (in short, Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI CHAUHAN Signing Date:17.11.2023 11:49:09 Signature Not Verified

ITA 576/2023

Page 2 of 2

“Tribunal”]. 4. Although, even according to the appellant/revenue, there is a huge delay in filing the appeal, we are not required to deal with this aspect of the matter as Mr Sunil Agarwal, learned senior standing counsel, who appears on behalf of appellant/revenue, fairly informs us that the proposed questions of law raised in the present appeal are covered by a coordinate bench judgment rendered in the respondent’s/assessee’s case concerning AYs 2005-06 to 2009-10. 5. For this purpose, our attention has been drawn to the judgment passed in ITA Nos. 411/2022 to 414/2022 & 417/2022. These appeals are titled Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-7 vs Pilot Industries Limited, 2022/DHC/004464. 6. In these circumstances, the appeal and the applications are closed. 7. Parties will act based on the digitally signed copy of the order.

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.

GIRISH KATHPALIA, J.

OCTOBER 19, 2023/RY

Click here to check corrigendum, if any

Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI CHAUHAN Signing Date:17.11.2023 11:49:09 Signature Not Verified

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →