Pr. Commissioner of Income-tax v. Shree Vardhman Overseas Ltd
[Citation -2019-LL-0730-26]
| Citation | 2019-LL-0730-26 |
|---|---|
| Appellant Name | Pr. Commissioner of Income-tax |
| Respondent Name | Shree Vardhman Overseas Ltd. |
| Court | HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI |
| Relevant Act | Income-tax |
| Date of Order | 30/07/2019 |
| Assessment Year | 1998-99 |
| Judgment | View Judgment |
| Keyword Tags | retrospective effect • penalty |
| Bot Summary: | Learned counsel for the Respondent Assessee informs the Court that after the Assessment Year AY 1998-99 for which the Assessee had filed a return showing a loss, the Assessee continued to suffer losses and its business was ultimately shut down in 2001. He further states that on account of the Income Tax Department seeking to recover the penalty amount from one of the directors of the Assessee the business of which was closed, an application under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was filed in the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal following its judgment ITA 1229/2018 Page 1 of 3 dismissing the Assessee s appeal i.e. ITA 883/Del/2013 for the AY in question on 31st July 2017. It is contended by the Revenue that in exercise of the power under Section 254(2) of the Act, the ITAT could not have reviewed its earlier order as the judgment on the basis of which the earlier decision was reversed was not of the jurisdictional High Court but of the Karnataka High Court. While the Court is conscious that the question that has been raised by the Revenue merits consideration, in the facts of the present case where the business of the Respondent Assessee has closed way back in 2001 and the proceedings pertain to AY 1998-1999 which is more than two decades ago, the Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order of the ITAT. ITA 1229/2018 Page 2 of 3 5. The questions of law urged by the Revenue are left open for consideration in an appropriate case. |