COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-2 V. L. G. ELECTRONICS INC LTD.

ITA/353/2022

AI Insights

The case involves multiple appeals by the Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation)-2 against L. G. Electronics Inc. These appeals were related to orders passed under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which allows the Commissioner to revise any order passed by an Assessing Officer. The primary legal contention was whether the tax effect from these orders justified the appeals, given that the tax effect was below the threshold of INR 1,00,00,000. The respondents argued that the tax effect was below the threshold, while the appellant contended that the tax effect could not be quantified due to the nature of the orders under Section 263. The court dismissed the appeals based on the low tax effect, citing the precedent set in Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Pushp Steel.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 683149 (HC-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 13-09-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Pushp Steel [2023 SCC OnLine Del 8240]
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: DEEPAK CHOPRA; ANKUL GOYAL; AOWITEYA GROVER
• Assessee Lawyers: SANJAY KUMAR; EASHA; HEMLATA RAWAT
• Keywords: Appeal; Commissioner; Income Tax; Low tax effect; Tax effect; Tax effect
• Section: 263

Judgement Text

"$~55 to 59 & 61 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 353/2022 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-2 .....Appellant Through: Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Sr.Standing Counsel with Ms. Easha and Ms.Hemlata Rawat, Standing Counsel. versus L. G. ELECTRONICS INC LTD. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Deepak Chopra, Mr. Ankul Goyal and Mr. Aowiteya Grover, Advs. 56 + ITA 354/2022 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-2 .....Appellant Through: Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Sr.Standing Counsel with Ms. Easha and Ms.Hemlata Rawat, Standing Counsel. versus L. G. ELECTRONICS INC. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Deepak Chopra, Mr. Ankul Goyal and Mr. Aowiteya Grover, Advs. 57 + ITA 355/2022 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-2 .....Appellant Through: Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Sr.Standing Counsel with Ms. Easha and This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 19/09/2024 at 12:09:34 Ms.Hemlata Rawat, Standing Counsel. versus L. G. ELECTRONICS INC. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Deepak Chopra, Mr. Ankul Goyal and Mr. Aowiteya Grover, Advs. 58 + ITA 356/2022 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-2 .....Appellant Through: Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Sr.Standing Counsel with Ms. Easha and Ms.Hemlata Rawat, Standing Counsel. versus L. G. ELECTRONICS INC. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Deepak Chopra, Mr. Ankul Goyal and Mr. Aowiteya Grover, Advs. 59 + ITA 381/2022 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-2 .....Appellant Through: Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Sr.Standing Counsel with Ms. Easha and Ms.Hemlata Rawat, Standing Counsel. versus L. G. ELECTRONICS INC. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Deepak Chopra, Mr. Ankul This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 19/09/2024 at 12:09:34 Goyal and Mr. Aowiteya Grover, Advs. 61 + ITA 391/2022 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-2 .....Appellant Through: Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Sr.Standing Counsel with Ms. Easha and Ms.Hemlata Rawat, Standing Counsel. versus L. G. ELECTRONICS INC. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Deepak Chopra, Mr. Ankul Goyal and Mr. Aowiteya Grover, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA % 13.09.2024 O R D E R 1. Mr. Chopra, learned counsel appearing for the respondents has drawn our attention to the tax effect which would form subject matter of the instant appeals and all of those being below INR 1,00,00,000/-. 2. However, Mr. Kumar had contended that since the challenge was to an order passed by the Commissioner under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [‘Act’], tax effect cannot be quantified and the appeals would therefore be maintainable. 3. We, however, take note of the following pertinent observations as rendered by a Division Bench of the Court in Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Pushp Steel [2023 SCC OnLine Del 8240] and This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 19/09/2024 at 12:09:34 which is extracted hereinbelow: “14. It is apparent from the above that the tax effect is in the vicinity of Rs. 2,20,100, which is less than the threshold of Rs. 1,00,00,000 for filing an appeal in the High Court. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that since the Commissioner had set aside the assessment order with a direction to the assessee to make a fresh assessment, the tax effect could not be ascertained and the appeal was not covered under the Central Board of Direct Taxes circulars issued in this regard. The said contention is unpersuasive. The orders passed under section 263 of the Act are not excluded from the purview of the circular issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) fixing the monetary limits for filing appeals. In the present case, although the Commissioner had remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer, he had also broadly quantified the income, which, according to the Commissioner, had been underassessed. A meaningful reading of the order passed by the Commissioner under section 263 of the Act clearly indicates that the net tax effect of setting aside the said order is far below the monetary limit specified by the Central Board of Direct Taxes 15. In view of the aforesaid, we dismiss the present appeal on the ground that it is belated; the tax effect is below the monetary limit; and no substantial question of law arises in the present appeal.” . 4. In view of the aforesaid, these appeals shall stand dismissed on the ground of low tax effect. YASHWANT VARMA, J RAVINDER DUDEJA, J SEPTEMBER 13, 2024 ns This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 19/09/2024 at 12:09:34 "