Dismissed
Commissioner of Income Tax Faridabad v. Escorts Employees Ancillaries
Punjab & Haryana HCITA/490/2010
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND…
What the court decided
AI extract
of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND…
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
ITA No.490 of 2010
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
ITA No.490 of 2010 (O & M) Date of decision: 09.11.2011
The Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad
….Appellant
Vs.
M/s Escorts Employees Ancillaries Ltd., (now known as ECO Auto Components Ltd.) 20/4, Mathura Road, Faridabad
….Respondent
CORAM: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE G.S.SANDHAWALIA
Present: Mr.Tejinder K.Joshi, Advocate, for the appellant,
Mr.Sanjay Bansal, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Robin Daryal, Advocate, for the respondent.
HEMANT GUPTA J. (ORAL)
The Revenue has claimed the following substantial questions of law arising out the order dated 25.09.2009d passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench ‘B’ New Delhi in ITA No.1771/Del/2008 for the Asstt. Year 2000-01.
“ I. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. ITAT was right in law in upholding the order of the Ld. CIT (A) in holding the initiation of reassessment proceedings invalid even though the income had escaped the assessment and the original assessment order resulted into under assessment and is contrary to the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of New Light Trading Co. vs CIT 256 ITR 391 (Del.) and Hon’ble Gujrat High Court in the case of
ITA No.490 of 2010
2
CIT vs PVS Beedies (P) Ltd. Vs ACIT 236 ITR 832 (Guj.)?
II. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. ITAT was right in law in not adjudicating the addition deleted by the Ld. CIT (A) in holding that they are academic and the same in dismissed and not confirming the order of the Assessing Officer ?”
Learned counsel for the respondent states that said questions of
law were also questions of law raised in the case of Dullichand Singhania
v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (2004) 269 ITR 192 (Punjab &
Haryana) and vide order dated 20.12.2003, such questions of law have been answered against the Revenue.
Keeping in view the said fact, the present appeal is dismissed.
(HEMANT GUPTA) JUDGE
09.11.2011 sailesh
(G.S.SANDHAWALIA) JUDGE
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the ITAT was right in law in upholding the order of the CIT(A) in holding the initiation of reassessment proceedings invalid.
Whether the ITAC was right in law in not adjudicating the addition deleted by the CIT(A) in holding that they are academic.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
New Light Trading Company vs CITReferred¶16
New Light Trading Co. vs CIT 256 ITR 391 (Del.)
CIT vs PVS Beedies (P) Ltd.Referred¶16
CIT vs PVS Beedies (P) Ltd. Vs ACIT 236 ITR 832 (Guj.)
Dullichand Singhania v. Assistant Commissioner of Income TaxReferred¶22
Dullichand Singhania v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (2004) 269 ITR 192 (Punjab & Haryana)
1 provisions across 1 enactments
The Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad
M/s Escorts Employees Ancillaries Ltd.
Hemant Gupta
G.S. Sandhawalia
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court