Full Text
Translation output
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
4,6 &7
4,6 &7
ITA 336/2019
THEPR.COMMISSIONER OFINCOME TAX -4 Appellant
Through: Mr Zoheb Hossain, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr Deepak Anand, Junior Standing Counsel for Revenue.
THEPR.COMMISSIONER OFINCOME TAX -4 Appellant
Through: Mr Zoheb Hossain, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr Deepak Anand, Junior Standing Counsel for Revenue.
VERSUS
HOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. Respondent
Through: Mr Gagan Kumar Mohita,Advocate.
Through: Mr Gagan Kumar Mohita,Advocate.
ITA 340/2019
THEPR.COMMISSIONER OFINCOME TAX-4 Appellant
THEPR.COMMISSIONER OFINCOME TAX-4 Appellant
VERSUS
CORPORATION LTD Respondent
ITA 342/2019
THE PR.COMMISSIONER OFINCOME TAX -4 Appellant
THE PR.COMMISSIONER OFINCOME TAX -4 Appellant
VERSUS
CORPORATION LTD. Respondent
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE TALWANT SINGH 2019:DHC:7412-DB c
06.08.2019
06.08.2019
CM 15172/2019(exemption)in ITA 340/2019
CM 15394/2019(exemption)in ITA 342/2019
1.Allowed,subjectto alljust exceptions.
1.Allowed,subjectto alljust exceptions.
ITA 336/2019
ITA 340/2019
ITA 342/2019
2.1n all these three matters, the short question urged by the Revenue is whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal(TTAT')could have decided the application filed by the Assessee under Section 254(2)of the Income
Tax Act, 1961 ('Act') beyond the time stipulated therein, which is six months.The amendmentto Section 254 prescribing the above time limit was made with effect from 1^'June,2016.
2.1n all these three matters, the short question urged by the Revenue is whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal(TTAT')could have decided the application filed by the Assessee under Section 254(2)of the Income
Tax Act, 1961 ('Act') beyond the time stipulated therein, which is six months.The amendmentto Section 254 prescribing the above time limit was made with effect from 1^'June,2016.
ORDER
3. Learned counsel for the Assessee appearing on advance notice points out that after the impugned order passed by the ITAT under Section 254(2)of the Act, restoring the appeals for a fresh hearing before itself, the appeals have in fact been heard and orders reserved. In view of these subsequent developments,the Court does not consider it appropriate to interfere in these cases. The question of law urged, however, left open for consideration in some other appropriate case.
4. The appeals are dismissed.No costs.
S. IDHAR,J
TALWANT SINGH,J