Dismissed

Cit Rohtak v. Tek Singh Saini

Punjab & Haryana HC1 Sept 2010ITA/284/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Supreme Court heard an appeal by the Revenue challenging the ITAT's dismissal of an appeal against the quashing of a Section 263 revision. As the Section 263 order was invalidated, the ITAT order was consequential. The appeal was dismissed insofar as it remained subjudice.

What did the court decide?

The appeal under Section 260A was dismissed as no substantial question of law arose from the consequential ITAT order.

Cit Rohtak Vs Tek Singh Saini — Income Tax | Punjab & Haryana HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

ITA No. 284 of 2010 (O&M)

¶3

Date of Decision: 1.9.2010

¶4

Commissioner of Income-tax, Rohtak

....Appellant.

Versus

Tek Singh Saini

...Respondent.

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL.

¶10

PRESENT: Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Advocate for the appellant.

¶11

ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J.

¶12

Revenue has preferred this appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”) against the order dated 2.3.2009 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench “SMC” New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal”) in ITA No. 3601(Del)/ 2008, for the assessment year 2000-01, proposing following substantial question of law:-

¶13

“Whether ITAT is right in law in dismissing the appeal of the Revenue, when the appeal against the order of the Tribunal quashing the order passed u/s 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 of the Commissioner of Income is pending before the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court?”

¶14

Against the order of assessment, the Commissioner

¶15

ITA No. 284 of 2010 (O&M)

¶16

-2-

¶17

passed an order under Section 263 and directed fresh assessment to be made. Accordingly, fresh assessment was made. The said revisional order under Section 263 was set aside by the Tribunal against which appeal of the revenue was dismissed by this Court on 9.2.2010 being ITA No. 202 of 2009 (Commissioner of Income Tax, Rohtak v. Sh. Tek Chand Saini). By impugned order Tribunal has set aside the assessment made.

¶18

We have heard learned counsel for the appellant.

¶19

In view of the fact that order under Section 263 of the Act has been held to be invalid, the order passed by the Tribunal is merely consequential. Learned counsel for the appellant could not point out any error in the impugned order. No substantial question of law arises.

¶20

Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

¶21

(ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) JUDGE

¶22

September 1, 2010 (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) gbs JUDGE

Cit Rohtak v. Tek Singh Saini

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Cit Rohtak v. Tek Singh Saini

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Commissioner of Ce Commissioinerate, Chd Vs M/S Saraswati Rubber Works (P) Ltd.

M/S Vishnu Fruit Traders Vs State of Punjab & Others

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Haryana Warehousing Corp.

Santokh Singh Dhillon Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Mangal Sain Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

M/S Ram Gopal Murli Dhar Juntra Vs State of Haryana