9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (5) TMI 304 - HC - Income TaxStay of demand exceeding 365 days - delay in disposal of appeal as not attributable to the assessee - HELD THAT - Wherever the appeal could not be decided by the Tribunal due to pressure of pendency of cases and the delay in disposal of the appeal is not attributable to the assessee in any manner, the interim protection can continue beyond 365 days in deserving cases Se PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GURGAON VERSUS M/S CARRIER AIR CONDITIONING AND REFRIGERATION LIMITED 2016 (5) TMI 396 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT . No substantial question of law.
Issues involved:
1. Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. 2. Interpretation of the Second Proviso of Section 254(2A) and Third Proviso to Section 254(2A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 regarding the period of stay exceeding 365 days and the effect on the order of the ITAT. Analysis: 1. The appeal was filed by the revenue against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for the assessment year 2011-12, raising questions regarding the period of stay exceeding 365 days. The High Court noted that the matter in question had already been decided in a previous case, where it was held that the identical issue raised in the present appeal did not constitute a substantial question of law. The Court referred to a previous decision, ITA-5-2016, where a similar issue was addressed and dismissed, establishing a precedent. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the present appeal based on the reasoning and decision in the earlier case. 2. The High Court's decision was based on the interpretation of the relevant provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961. It was acknowledged that the issue raised by the revenue was not a new one and had been previously settled by the Court. The Court emphasized that the matter was no longer res integra, indicating that the question at hand had already been conclusively addressed. The Court's reliance on a prior judgment, which had determined that the issue did not amount to a substantial question of law, played a pivotal role in the dismissal of the current appeal. By referencing the provisions of the Income Tax Act and the precedent set by the earlier decision, the High Court upheld consistency in its interpretation and application of the law, leading to the dismissal of the appeal filed by the revenue.
|
