Case LawHigh Court › Vanguard Carrier Pvt.ltd v. Commissioner...

Vanguard Carrier Pvt.ltd v. Commissioner Of Income Tax-9 New Delhi

High Court 11 Aug 2016 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · dhcdb
Parties
Vanguard Carrier Pvt.ltd v. Commissioner Of Income Tax-9 New Delhi
Date of order
11 Aug 2016
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

Case summary

In Vanguard Carrier Pvt.ltd v. Commissioner Of Income Tax-9 New Delhi, the High Court (2016) decided the matter.

Decision: Appeal stands disposed of in above terms.

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

The order — as passed by the High Court

$~7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 179/2016 VANGUARD CARRIER PVT.LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Dr.Rakesh Gupta, Mr.Somil Agarwal, Mr.Rohit Kumar Gupta and Ms.Monika Ghai, Advocates versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-9 NEW DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Mr.P.Roychaudhuri, Sr.Standing Counsel with Ms.Vibhuti Malhotra, Advocate CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA O R D E R% 11.08.2016 We are of the opinion that no question of law arises. However, it is sought to be urged on behalf of the assessee by Mr.Gupta that since the jurisdiction issue arises this court should consider the matter particularly having regard to the fact that re-assessment is ordered in respect of an assessment year which was completed 10 years ago. This court is of the opinion that all issues including jurisdiction can be gone into by the CIT (A). Having regard to the circumstances of the case, CIT shall decide the appeal expeditiously preferably within six months. Appeal stands disposed of in above terms. S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J AUGUST 11, 2016 rb DEEPA SHARMA, 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