Facts of the Case

The Revenue filed an appeal before the Delhi High Court under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 against the order dated 16 August 2002 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Delhi, in ITA No. 605/Del/1997 relating to Assessment Year 1993-94.

While dismissing the Revenue's appeal, the Tribunal had relied upon its earlier orders passed in the assessee’s own cases for Assessment Years 1991-92, 1992-93 and 1994-95. The Tribunal also recorded that the Departmental Representative had not pointed out any decision supporting the Revenue's stand.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in relying upon its earlier orders in the assessee’s own cases while deciding the appeal for Assessment Year 1993-94.
  2. Whether the Revenue could raise a completely new contention before the High Court under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act when such plea had not been raised before the Tribunal.
  3. Whether any substantial question of law arose from the Tribunal’s order warranting interference by the High Court.

Petitioner’s (Revenue’s) Arguments

The Revenue, represented by senior standing counsel, vehemently contended that:

  • The Tribunal was not justified in relying upon its earlier orders.
  • The facts relating to the assessment year under consideration were materially different from the facts involved in the earlier assessment years.
  • Therefore, the Tribunal ought not to have followed its previous decisions while adjudicating the appeal for Assessment Year 1993-94.

Respondent’s Arguments

The respondent-assessee did not appear before the High Court. However, the Tribunal’s order reflected that:

  • Similar issues had already been decided in favour of the assessee in earlier assessment years.
  • No contrary judicial precedent or authority had been brought to the Tribunal’s notice by the Departmental Representative.
  • Accordingly, the Tribunal followed its own earlier decisions in the assessee’s case and dismissed the Revenue’s appeal.

Court Order / Findings

The Delhi High Court dismissed the Revenue’s appeal and held that:

  • The Revenue could not be permitted to raise an entirely new case before the High Court under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act.
  • The contention that the facts for the relevant assessment year were different from those involved in earlier years had never been raised before the Tribunal.
  • Since the plea was not urged before the Tribunal, it could not be entertained for the first time in an appeal under Section 260A.
  • The Court also noted that in respect of Assessment Year 1992-93 (ITA No. 199/2002), a similar appeal filed by the Revenue had already been dismissed by the High Court on 18 September 2002.
  • Following the earlier order, the present appeal was also dismissed.

Important Clarification

The judgment reiterates an important appellate principle:

  • A party cannot raise a completely new factual contention before the High Court under Section 260A when such contention was not raised before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.
  • Consistency in adjudication is to be maintained where identical issues in the assessee’s own case have already been decided for earlier years and no distinguishing facts are shown before the Tribunal.
  • Appeals under Section 260A are confined to substantial questions of law arising from the Tribunal’s order and cannot be used to introduce new factual disputes.

Sections Involved

  • Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 – Appeal to High Court.
  • Provisions relating to exemption of charitable/religious institutions were indirectly involved through the status of the respondent trust/mandir.

Link to Download the Order -https://delhihighcourt.nic.in/app/case_number_pdf/2003:DHC:20103-DB/DKJ14072003ITA1962003_161748.pdf

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.