EMPLOYEES' PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION (SOUTH), NEW DELHI V. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-76(1), NEW DELHI & ORS.

W.P.(C)/7850/2017

AI Insights

The case involves multiple writ petitions filed by the Employees' Provident Fund Organisation (South), New Delhi, against the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-76(1), New Delhi, and others. The petitions were related to disputes over several Assessment Years (2008-09 to 2013-14). The core issue in these petitions was previously decided against the Petitioner by the ITAT in an order dated 3rd August 2016. The High Court of Delhi, presided by Justice S. Muralidhar and Justice Prathiba M. Singh, did not entertain the petitions at this stage, advising the Petitioner to first challenge the ITAT's earlier decision before reviving these writ petitions.

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 751829 (HC-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 06-09-2017
• Assessment Year: misc
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: RAHUL CHAUDHARY; SANJAY MISHRA; P S SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: PANKAJ GARG; MILIND GARG; A S M TRIPATHI; MANSI BATRA
• Keywords: Assessment years; Employees Provident Fund Organisation; Income tax appellate tribunal; Writ petition

Judgement Text

"! $- * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 44,45,46 & 47 + W.P. (C) No. 7849/2017 EMPLOYEES' PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION (SOUTH), NEW DELHI ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Pankaj Garg, Mr. Milind Garg, Mr. A.S.M. Tripathi and Ms. Mansi Batra, Advocates versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-76(1), NEW DELHI & ORS. . .... Respondents + Through: Mr. Rahul Chaudhary, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr. Sanjay Kumar Mishra, Junior Standing Counsel for Revenue Mr. P.S. Singh, Advocate for R-3 - UOI W.P. (C) No. 7850/2017 EMPLOYEES' PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION (SOUTH), NEW DELHI ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Pankaj Garg, Mr. Milind Garg, Mr. A.S.M. Tripathi and Ms. Mansi Batra, Advocates versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-76(1), NEW DELHI & ORS ..... Respondents + Through: Mr. Rahul Chaudhary, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr. Sanjay Kumar Mishra, Junior Standing Counsel for Revenue Mr. P.S. Singh, Advocate for R-3 - UOI W.P. (C) No. 785112017 EMPLOYEES' PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION (SOUTH), NEW DELHI ..... Petitioner w.P.(C) 784912017 & Connected matters Page 1 of 3 Signing Date:16.10.2024 16:52:42 Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified Through: Mr. Pankaj Garg, Mr. Milind Garg, Mr. A.S.M. Tripathi and Ms. Mansi Batra, Advocates versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-76(1), NEW DELHI & ORS ..... Respondents + Through: Mr. Rahul Chaudhary, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr. Sanjay Kumar Mishra, Junior Standing Counsel for Revenue Mr. P.S. Singh, Advocate for R-3 - UOI w.P. (C) No. 7852/2017 EMPLOYEES' PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION (SOUTH), NEW DELHI ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Pankaj Garg, Mr. Milind Garg, Mr. A.S.M. Tripathi and Ms. Mansi Batra, Advocates versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-76(1), NEW DELHI & ORS ..... Respondents CORAM: Through: Mr. Rahul Chaudhary, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr. Sanjay Kumar Mishra, Junior Standing Counsel for Revenue Mr. P.S. Singh, Advocate for R-3 - UOI JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH ORDER 0/0 06.09.2017 C.M. APPL. 32474/2017 (exemption) in W.P. (C) No. 784912017 C.M. APPL. 32476/2017 (exemption) in W.P. (C) No. 785012017 C.M. APPL. 32478/2017 (exemption) in W.P. (C) No. 785112017 C.M. APPL. 32480/2017 (exemption) in W.P. (C) No. 785212017 W.P.(C) 7849120/7 & Connected matters Page 2 of 3 1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. w.P. (C) No. 7849/2017 & C.M. APPL. 32473/2017 (stay) W.P. (C) No. 785012017 & C.M. APPL. 32475/2017 (stay) W.P. (C) No. 785112017 & C.M. APPL. 32477/2017 (stay) W.P. (C) No. 785212017 & C.M. APPL. 32479/2017 (stay) 2. These writ petitions are not entertained at this stage because the Petitioner has not yet decided to challenge the order dated 3 rd August 2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal CIT AT') in the Petitioner's own case for earlier Assessment Years CAYs'), i.e. 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14 where the issue involved in these petitions was decided against the Petitioner. 3. Accordingly these petitions are disposed of with liberty to the Petitioner to revive the challenge in these writ petitions after the Petitioner's appeal against the order dated 3rd August 2016 passed by the ITAT is filed and entertained by the Court. S. MURALIDHAR, J. PRA THIBA M. SINGH, J. SEPTEMBER 06, 2017 rd W.P. (C) 784912017 & Connected matters Page 3 of3 "