Revenue questioned ITAT's extension of interim order beyond 365 days. Relying on Pepsi Foods decision, the court held no question of law arose.
The appeal is dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~26
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1
..... Appellant Through: Mr. Sanjay Kumar & Mr. Rahul Chaudhary, Standing Counsels for Revenue.
versus
AIRCOM INTERNATIONAL (INDIA) PVT. LTD.
..... Respondent
Through: None.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA
O R D E R % 12.02.2018
The question of law urged by the Revenue is whether the ITAT could extend an interim order beyond the statutorily permissible limit of 365 days. The ITAT followed the decision of this Court in Pepsi Foods P. Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (2015) 376 ITR 87 (Del.). No question of law arises; the appeal is, therefore, dismissed.
S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J
A. K. CHAWLA, J
FEBRUARY 12, 2018/kks
1 issue framed by the court
whether the ITAT could extend an interim order beyond the statutorily permissible limit of 365 days.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Pepsi Foods P. Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income TaxRelied on¶12
(2015) 376 ITR 87 (Del.)
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1
Aircom International (India) Pvt. Ltd.
S. Ravindra Bhat
A. K. Chawla
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
