Ita/117/2017 Of The Pr.commissioner Of Income Tax, Gurgaon v. M/S Carrier Air-Conditioning And Refrigeration Ltd

ITA No. 117 of 2017(O0&M) a 112IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA|AT CHANDIGARH ITA No. 117 of 2017(O0&M)Date of decision : 28.03.2017 The Pr.Commissioner of Income Tax, Gurgaon Versus| nee. Petitioner M/s Carrier Air-Conditioning and Refrigeration Ltd, wees REeSpondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTALHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMENDRA JAIN Present:Mr. Tejinder K.Joshi, Advocatefor the appellant-revenue. 888 AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (Oral) This appeal has been filed under Section 260A of the IncomeTax Act, 1961(in short ‘the Act’) against the order dated 05.08.2016 passedby the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench, “FRIDAY”,NewDelhi, claiming following substantial questions of law:- “ 1. Whether the Hon'ble ITAT has acted in contravention ofthe second Proviso of Section 254(2A) of the Income Tax Act,1961, as the combined period of stay has exceeded 365 days? 2. Whether the order of the ITAT be treated as void ab initioin light of Third Proviso to Section 254(2A) of the Income TaxAct, 1961, which provides that stay of demand stands vacatedafter expiry of a period of 365 days, even if delay in disposal ofappeal is not attributable to the assessee. ? ITA No. 117 of 2017(O0&M) ?DIt was not disputed by learned counsel for the appellant-revenuethat the matter in issue is no longer res integra and stands concluded by thedecision of this Court in ITA No. 5 of 2016 decided on 25.04.2016, wherebyidentical question as claimed in the present appeal, has been held not to besubstantial question of law. 3,For the reasons recorded in the aforementioned appeal, thepresent appeal is dismissed, (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL )JUDGE ( RAMENDRA JAIN )JUDGEH March 28, 2017sunita Whether speaking/reasonedWhether Reportable Yes/NoYes/No