Case LawHigh Court › Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax Delhi-7 v...

Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax Delhi-7 v. M/S. Planman Consulting Pvt. Ltd. Through

High Court 02 Nov 2018 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · dhcdb
Parties
Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax Delhi-7 v. M/S. Planman Consulting Pvt. Ltd. Through
Date of order
02 Nov 2018
Assessment year(s)
2012-13
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax Delhi-7 v. M/S. Planman Consulting Pvt. Ltd. Through, the High Court (2018) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

Sections referenced in this judgment

The order — as passed by the High Court

$~59 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ ITA 1221/2018 PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI-7..... Appellant Through Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing Counsel. versus M/S. PLANMAN CONSULTING PVT. LTD. Through ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI O R D E R% 02.11.2018 C.M. No.46129/2018 Delay in re-filing is condoned. ITA No.1221/2018 Two issues/questions are raised by the Revenue in this appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act, for short) in the case of Planman Consulting Pvt. Ltd., which relates to assessment year 2012-13. The first issue relates to disallowance under Section under Section 14A of the Act. It is an accepted and admitted position that the assessee had not earned any exempt income during the year in question. This being the position, the issue is covered against the Revenue by decision dated 22[nd] October, 2018 in ITA No.725/2018, Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-6, New Delhi Vs. McDonalds India Pvt. Ltd. and two decisions of this High Court quoted therein, namely, Cheminvest Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax IV [2015] 378 ITR 33 (Delhi) and Commissioner of –Income-tax IV Vs. Holcim India Pvt. Ltd. (2014) 272 CTR 282 (Delhi). Decision of the Supreme Court in Maxopp Investment Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income tax, (2018) 402 ITR 640 (SC) also affirms the said view. The second issue/question relates to late deposit of Provident Fund, share of Employees State Insurance and professional tax. It is accepted that the said payments were made before the due date of the filing of the return. Accordingly, this issue is covered by decision of this court in ITA No.1063/2008, Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Aimil Ltd. dated 23[rd] December, 2009. In view of the aforesaid position, no substantial question of law arises for consideration in the appeal and the same in dismissed. SANJIV KHANNA, J. NOVEMBER 02, 2018 NA ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI, J.
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation. Full disclaimer & Terms.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan