Case Law Details
PCIT Vs Meera Gupta (Delhi High Court)
Introduction: The Delhi High Court (HC) recently addressed a series of appeals filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) against Meera Gupta concerning Assessment Years (AY) 2009-10, 2011-12, and 2013-14. These appeals were related to the condonation of delay and the assessment issue already resolved and affirmed by the Supreme Court. The HC’s judgment offers an insight into how appellate courts deal with matters that have been previously adjudicated.
Analysis:
1. Condonation of Delay: The appellant/revenue acknowledged an 89-day delay in filing the appeals. The HC condoned the delay, considering the reasons mentioned in the application.
2. Assessment Issue: The appeals concerned completed assessments for the aforementioned AYs. According to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal’s findings, no incriminating material was found for these years.
3. Precedent: The HC identified that the issue at hand had already been addressed in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) Vs. Kabul Chawla (2016, 380 ITR, 573), a judgment subsequently affirmed by the Supreme Court in PCIT vs Abhisar Buildwell.
4. Closure of Appeals: Since the matter was previously decided, and no substantial question of law arose, the HC closed the appeals, reiterating the need for finality in litigation.
Conclusion: The Delhi HC’s dismissal of the appeals in the case of PCIT vs Meera Gupta emphasizes the importance of finality and consistency in legal decisions. By referring to earlier judgments and Supreme Court affirmations, the Court ensured that the principles of res judicata were upheld, thereby preventing re-litigation of the same issue. The decision serves as a precedent for other cases, affirming the finality of judgments and the efficient use of judicial resources.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF DELHI HIGH COURT
1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions.
CM No. 37823/2023 in ITA No. 403/2023
CM No.37841/2023 in ITA No. 405/2023
CM No.37849/2023 in ITA No. 406/2023
2. These are applications moved on behalf of the appellant/revenue, seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeals.
2.1 According to the appellant/revenue, there is a delay of 89 days in filing the above-captioned appeals.
3. For the reasons mentioned in the application, the delay is condoned.
4. The applications are disposed of.
ITA No. 403/2023, ITA No. 405/2023 and ITA No. 406/2023
5. These appeals concern Assessment Year (AY) 2013-14 (ITA No. 403/2023), AY 2011-12 (ITA 405/2023) & AY 2009-10 (ITA 406/2023).
6. Mr Puneet Rai, learned senior standing counsel, who appears on behalf of appellant/revenue, says that as per the findings confirmed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [in short, “Tribunal”] via a common judgment dated 12.10.2022, no incriminating material was found vis-à-vis in these AYs.
7. It is also not disputed that these AYs concern completed assessments.
8. Thus, even according to Mr Rai, the issue which arises in the present appeals stands covered by the judgment of the coordinate bench of this Court, rendered in Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short, CIT(A)] Vs. Kabul Chawla, (2016, 380 ITR, 573).
9. The aforementioned judgment has been affirmed by the Supreme Court in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central-3 vs Abhisar Buildwell, 2023, SCCOnline SC 481.
10. Consequently, the above-captioned appeals are closed, as no substantial question of law arises for our consideration.
11. Parties will act based on the digitally signed copy of the order.
