Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Commissioner Of Income Tax-Ii, ... vs M/S Bharat Udyog Sicop Etc on 27 January, 2016

Author: Ajay Kumar Mittal

Bench: Ajay Kumar Mittal

                                IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                                             AT CHANDIGARH

                                                                      ITA No. 78 of 2012 (O&M)
                                                                      Decided on : 27.01.2016

              The Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Amritsar
                                                                                      . . . Appellant
                                                         Versus
              M/s Bharat Udyog SICOP
                                                                                    . . . Respondent

              CORAM:              HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL
                                  HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE RAJ RAHUL GARG

              PRESENT: Mr. Denesh Goyal, Advocate
                       for the appellant-revenue.

                                  Mr. Rajiv Sharma, Advocate
                                  for the respondent-assessee.
                                                          ****

              AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (Oral)

Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the tax effect involved is ` 3,15,530/-, he has instructions to withdraw the present appeal in view of the circular No.21/2015, dated 10.12.2015 issued by the C.B.D.T., New Delhi. However, he prayed that liberty be granted to the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal in case something survives therein.

2. Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. It is, however, clarified that withdrawal of the appeal by the revenue shall not be taken to be affirmation of order of the Tribunal on merits. Further, the legal issue as claimed by the revenue is being left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case.




                                                                  (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL)
                                                                         JUDGE


                                                                     (RAJ RAHUL GARG)
              January 27, 2016                                             JUDGE
              J.Ram
JAWALA RAM
2016.02.02 16:35
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
Chandigarh