Case Law Details
PCIT Vs Madhur Mittal (Delhi High Court)
The scope of jurisdiction in Section 260A is very well settled. It is a settled proposition that ITAT is the final arbiter of the facts. High Court can interfere in the order of the ITAT only if there is substantial question of law or there is manifest illegality or it suffers from perversity. The general rule is that High Court should be slow in interfering into the findings of ITAT, unless it suffers from any of the grounds mentioned hereinabove.
In this case tribunal has minutely examined the case and marshaled the facts well. It may be noted that the ITAT is final arbiter of the facts and appeal can be entertained by the High court only if there is a substantial question of law.
HC consider that there is no substantial question of law in the present case. We also do not find any perversity in the order passed by the tribunal.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF DELHI HIGH COURT
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
