THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) CHANDIGARH vs. M/S BARNALA IMPROVEMENT TRUST BARNALA PUNJAB

PDF · subscribers
ITA/418/2019HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01106026201916 September 2026Author: MR. JUSTICE SUNISH BINDLISH,MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL1 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the present appeal is to be dismissed in light of the judgment of the Supreme Court dated 16.09.2026 passed in Civil Appeal No. 21762 of 2017, titled Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) Vs. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority. The reasoning is based on the consensus reached by both learned counsel for the parties, who agreed that the appeal should be decided in the assessee's favour by applying the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the cited case. The operative direction is the dismissal of the appeal. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax against M/s The Improvement Trust, Barnala. The assessment year(s) are not explicitly stated. The order or action under challenge is an appeal before the High Court. The procedural history indicates that the parties agreed that the present appeal should be decided in light of a Supreme Court judgment dated 16.09.2026 in Civil Appeal No. 21762 of 2017, which was between Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) and Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority. The amount in dispute is not stated. The High Court was to decide the appeal based on this consensus.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the present appeal should be dismissed in light of the Supreme Court's judgment in Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) Vs. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority (supra)? (Question of law) Assessee's Contention: The assessee, through their counsel, agreed with the revenue that the present appeal should be dismissed in light of the Supreme Court's judgment dated 16.09.2026 in Civil Appeal No. 21762 of 2017 - Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) Vs. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority. They relied on the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the aforementioned case. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, through their counsel, also agreed that the present appeal should be dismissed in light of the Supreme Court's judgment dated 16.09.2026 in Civil Appeal No. 21762 of 2017 - Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) Vs. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority. They relied on the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the aforementioned case.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

201(2) 201(2) 201(2) 201(2)

IN T IN T IN T IN T THE COMMI THE COMMI THE COMMI THE COMMI

M/S THE IM S THE IM S THE IM S THE IMP

CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: HO HO

HO HO

Present : M M for M M

**

DEEPAK SIB DEEPAK SIB DEEPAK SIB DEEPAK SIB

Le covered in the 19.10.2022 pa Commissioner Development A

Re light of law Development A

16.

09 16.09 16.09 16.09.2026 .2026 .2026 .2026 Vandana yadav

THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH

ITA ITA ITA ITA Da Da Da Da

SSIONER OF INCOME TAX SSIONER OF INCOME TAX SSIONER OF INCOME TAX SSIONER OF INCOME TAX

VERSUS VERSUS VERSUS VERSUS PROVEMENT TRUST PROVEMENT TRUST PROVEMENT TRUST PROVEMENT TRUST BARNA BARNA BARNA BARNA

ON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEP DEEP DEEP DEEP ON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNI ON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNI ON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNI ON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNI Mr. Ranvijay Singh, Sr. Standing C r. Vidul Kapoor, Jr. Standing Co r the appellant. Ms. Reema, Advocate for Mr. H.S. Sidhu, Advocate, for the *** BAL AL BAL AL, J. , J. , J. , J.(O (O (O (Oral ral ral ral) earned counsel for the parties a assessee’s favour by a judgme assed in Civil Appeal No.2 r of Income Tax (Exemptio Authority. elying on the afore consensus, laid down by the Supreme Authority’s case (supra).

Whether speaking/reasoned. : Ye Whether Reportable. : Ye AB AND HARYANA AB AND HARYANA AB AND HARYANA AB AND HARYANA H A-418 418 418 418-2019 2019 2019 2019 ate of Decision : ate of Decision : ate of Decision : ate of Decision : 16.09. 16.09. 16.09. 16.09.2026 2026 2026 2026

CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH

...APPELLANT ...APPELLANT ...APPELLANT ...APPELLANT ALA PUNJAB ALA PUNJAB ALA PUNJAB ALA PUNJAB

...RESPONDENT ...RESPONDENT ...RESPONDENT ...RESPONDENT PAK SIBAL PAK SIBAL PAK SIBAL PAK SIBAL ISH BINDLISH ISH BINDLISH ISH BINDLISH ISH BINDLISH Counsel with unsel, respondent. agree that the present appeal is ent of the Supreme Court dated 21762 of 2017 - Assistant es/No es/No

s d t n e n VANDANA YADAV 2026.09.19 12:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →