Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Infomediary India Pvt. Ltd

THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 21.05.2013 +ITA 246/2013 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ... Appellant versus INFOMEDIARY INDIA PVT. LTD. ... Respondent +ITA 247/2013 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ... Appellant versus INFOMEDIARY INDIA PVT. LTD. ... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellant: Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal and Mr Puneet GuptaFor the Respondent: Mr Salil Kapoor, Mr T.R Talwal and Mr Vikas Jain CORAM:-HON’BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMEDHON’BLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) CM No. 7644/2013 in ITA 247/2013 The exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions. ITA 246/2013 & ITA 247/2013 1.The present appeals pertain to the assessment year 2001-02 andarise out of the common order passed by the Tribunal on 29.06.2012 inITA No. 4777/Del/2011 and ITA No. 4778/Del/2011, respectively. 2.In an earlier round before the Tribunal, the assessee had filedappeals being ITA Nos. 3479-3480/Del/2009. The Tribunal, by virtue ofits common order dated 16.10.2009, upheld the validity of proceedingsunder Section 147 of the Income – tax Act, 1961 and remanded the matteron merits to the file of the Assessing Officer.Being aggrieved, therespondent / assessee preferred appeals before this court being ITA Nos.1228-1229/2010. By a judgment and order dated 23.12.2011, this courtset aside the Tribunal’s order insofar as the validity of proceedings underSection 147 of the said Act were concerned. In other words, the HighCourt took the view that the proceedings under Section 147 of the saidAct were invalid. 3.In the meanwhile, in the remand proceedings, the AssessingOfficer framed the assessments on 29.11.2010 in respect of both theassessment years.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)dismissed the appeals filed therefrom by the assessee by two separateorders dated 16.08.2011.It is against those separate orders, that theassessee was in appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in ITANos. 4777-4778/Del/2011 which have been allowed by the Tribunal on29.06.2012 after noticing the fact that this court had, by its judgment andorder dated 23.12.2011, held the initiation of proceedings under Section 147/148 of the said Act to be invalid.We may also note thatsubsequently by an order dated 21.09.2012, the Special Leave Petitionpreferred by the revenue against the order dated 23.12.2011 in respect ofITA No. 1228/2010 also came to be dismissed. 4.Since the issue of the validity of the proceedings under Section 147has attained finality in the sense that the said proceedings have been heldto be invalid by this court, and the Special Leave Petition has also beendismissed by the Supreme Court, the Tribunal was correct in allowing theappeals filed by the respondent / assessee in respect of the remandproceedings. The remand was only consequent upon the decision of theTribunal in the earlier round to the effect that the proceedings underSection 147 of the said Act were valid.Now, those proceedings havebeen held to be invalid. Hence, the consequential remand proceedingswould be of no consequence. As such no interference is called for withthe impugned order passed by the Tribunal. No substantial question oflaw arises for our consideration. 5.These appeals are dismissed. BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J VIBHU BAKHRU, J MAY 21, 2013SU