Case LawHigh Court › The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Ja...

The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Jagatjit Industries Ltd

High Court 18 Jul 2019 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · dhcdb
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Jagatjit Industries Ltd
Date of order
18 Jul 2019
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Jagatjit Industries Ltd, the High Court (2019) decided the matter.

Issue: By an order dated 7[th] February, 2006 the following question of law was framed for consideration:- "Whether the Tribunal was justified in deleting interest under Section 234B of the Income Tax, 1961 even when ITNS 30 accompanying the assessment order computed the liability towards interest under th...

Decision: In that view of the matter, the appeal is disposed of as having been rendered infructuous.

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

Sections referenced in this judgment

$~R-19 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ ITA 969/2005 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Appellant Through Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Sr. Standing counsel versus M/S JAGATJIT INDUSTRIES LTD. ..... Respondent Through Mr. Arta Trana Panda, Advocate CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE TALWANT SINGH O R D E R % 18.07.2019 1. This is an appeal by the Revenue against the order dated 16[th] December, 2004 passed by the ITAT in ITA No. 3898/Del/1999 for the Assessment Year (AY) 1996-1997. 2. By an order dated 7[th] February, 2006 the following question of law was framed for consideration:- "Whether the Tribunal was justified in deleting interest under Section 234B of the Income Tax, 1961 even when ITNS 30 accompanying the assessment order computed the liability towards interest under the said Act.” 3. Learned counsel for the Revenue points out that the question now stands answered in favour of the Revenue by the judgment of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Bhagat Construction Company Private Limited 2016 383 ITR 9 (SC). However, it is pointed out by learned counsel for the Assessee that in the appeal effect order dated 23[rd] November 2005 passed by the Assessing Officer for the AY in question, the Assessee‟s assessed income is less than the returned income and therefore the present appeal has been rendered infructuous. Copies of the said order have been placed on record and handed over to learned counsel for the Revenue. 4. In that view of the matter, the appeal is disposed of as having been rendered infructuous. S. MURALIDHAR, J. JULY 18, 2019 mw TALWANT SINGH, 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