LUDHIANA CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LTD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III LUDHIANA

PDF · subscribers

ITA/427/2015HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01110081201530 March 2016Author: MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA,MRS JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY1 pages

AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court decided to dismiss the appeal as withdrawn, as prayed for by the appellant-assessee. The assessee's counsel explicitly stated their instructions to withdraw the appeal, citing that the matter was still pending before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for final adjudication. The counsel also indicated no objection to the ITAT's order of June 5, 2015, which had recalled its earlier order of February 25, 2014. Consequently, the High Court allowed the withdrawal of the appeal. No specific findings were made on the merits of the case, as the appeal was disposed of on procedural grounds based on the assessee's request.

What were the facts?

The appellant, The Ludhiana Central Cooperative Bank Limited, filed an appeal before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana against an order dated June 5, 2015, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Chandigarh Bench. This ITAT order was passed in Miscellaneous Application No. 32/CHD/2014, arising from ITA No. 526/CHD/2013, concerning Assessment Year 2009-10. The primary contention of the assessee was that the ITAT had recalled its earlier order dated February 25, 2014, pursuant to an application filed under Section 254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee's counsel informed the High Court that they wished to withdraw the present appeal as the matter was still pending before the ITAT for final adjudication.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should entertain an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, when the assessee wishes to withdraw the appeal because the underlying matter is still pending before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for final adjudication. Assessee's Contention: The learned counsel for the appellant-assessee stated that they had instructions to withdraw the present appeal. The reason provided was that the matter was still pending for final adjudication before the Tribunal. The assessee's counsel further stated that they had no objection to the order dated June 5, 2015, passed by the Tribunal, whereby the earlier order dated February 25, 2014, was recalled, and prayed for permission to withdraw the present appeal. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records no specific argument from the respondent-revenue on the issue of withdrawal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A,Section 254

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No. 427 of 2015 (O&M) Decided on : 30.03.2016 The Ludhiana Central Cooperative Bank Limited . . . Appellant Versus The Commissioner of Income Tax-III, Ludhiana . . . Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE RAJ RAHUL GARG PRESENT: Mr. Saurabh Goel, Advocate for the appellant-assessee. Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Advocate for the respondent-revenue. **** AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (Oral) The appellant-assessee has approached this Court under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'), impugning the order dated 5th June, 2015 (Annexure A-6), passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench 'A', Chandigarh (for brevity 'the Tribunal') in MA No. 32/CHD/2014 in ITA No. 526/CHD/2013, relating to the Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. The primary grievance of the appellant-assessee was that the Tribunal on an application filed under Section 254 of the Act, has recalled its earlier order dated 25th February, 2014. Learned counsel for the appellant- assessee states that he has instructions to withdraw the present appeal, as the matter is still pending for final adjudication before the Tribunal. He has further stated that he has no objection to the order dated 5th June, 2015, passed by the tribunal, whereby, the order dated 25th February, 2014 was recalled and prayed that he may be allowed to withdraw the present appeal.

Dismissed as withdrawn as prayed for. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE (RAJ RAHUL GARG) March 30, 2016 JUDGE J.Ram

JAWALA RAM 2016.04.04 10:46 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →