THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, PATIALA. vs. M/S CENTRAL MACHINERY CO. (P) LTD.

PDF · subscribers
ITC/19/1989HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01022448198903 March 2008Author: MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL,MR JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that in all the presented cases, pure questions of fact were involved, and consequently, no referable substantial question of law arose from the orders passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. Based on the revenue's concession regarding the nature of the issues, the High Court dismissed all the Income Tax Cases. No specific findings on the merits of the appeals before the ITAT were made, as the High Court's decision was based on the preliminary submission by the revenue. The operative direction was the dismissal of all the ITCs.

What were the facts?

These are a batch of Income Tax Cases (ITC) filed by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Patiala, against various assessees, including M/s Central Machinery Co.(P) Ltd., Shri Varinder Kumar Malik, M/s R.K.Goel & Sons (HUF), Shri S.C.Garg (HUF), M/s A.K.Steels, and Shri Shanti Sarup Chopra. The cases pertain to assessment years not explicitly stated in the provided text. The petitions challenge orders passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The procedural history involves the revenue filing these ITCs before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh.

What were the issues?

1. Whether a referable substantial question of law arises from the impugned orders passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The revenue, through its counsel, argued that in all these cases, only pure questions of fact are involved and no referable substantial question of law arises from the impugned orders passed by the Tribunal. The assessee's arguments are not recorded in the provided text. The revenue's contention is the sole basis for the court's decision.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Heard together (8 matters)

T.C. No.19 of 1989
T.C. No.35 of 1989
T.C. No.47 of 1989
T.C. No.50 of 1989
T.C. No.52 of 1989
T.C. No.53 of 1989
T.C. No.54 of 1989
T.C. No.76 of 1995

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH I.T.C. No.19 of 1989 The Commissioner of Income-tax, Patiala .....PETITIONER Versus M/s Central Machinery Co.(P) Ltd.Ludhiana ....RESPONDENT I.T.C. No.35 of 1989 The Commissioner of Income-tax, Patiala .....PETITIONER Versus M/s Central Machinery Co.(P) Ltd.Ludhiana ....RESPONDENT I.T.C. No.47 of 1989 The Commissioner of Income-tax, Patiala .....PETITIONER Versus Shri Varinder Kumar Malik Prop. M/s Arvind Tools & Traders, Ludhiana ....RESPONDENT I.T.C. No.50 of 1989 The Commissioner of Income-tax, Patiala .....PETITIONER Versus M/s R.K.Goel & Sons (HUF), Ludhiana ....RESPONDENT I.T.C. No.52 of 1989 The Commissioner of Income-tax, Patiala .....PETITIONER Versus Shri S.C.Garg (HUF) Ludhiana ....RESPONDENT -2- I.T.C. No.53 of 1989 The Commissioner of Income-tax, Patiala .....PETITIONER Versus M/s A.K.Steels, Ludhiana ....RESPONDENT I.T.C. No.54 of 1989 The Commissioner of Income-tax, Patiala .....PETITIONER Versus Shri Shanti Sarup Chopra, Ludhiana ....RESPONDENT I.T.C. No.76 of 1995 The Commissioner of Income-tax, Patiala .....PETITIONER Versus M/s Central Machinery Co.(P) Ltd.Ludhiana ....RESPONDENT DATE OF DECISION: MARCH 03, 2008 CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG --- Present: Mr.Sanjiv Bansal, Advocate, for the revenue. Mr.Akshay Bhan, Advocate, for the assessee. .. SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J. (Oral) This order shall dispose of ITC Nos.19,35,47,50,52,53,54 of 1989 and 76 of 1995. -3- During the course of arguments, Mr.Sanjiv Bansal, learned counsel for the revenue states that in all these cases pure questions of facts are involved and no referable substantial question of law arises from the impugned order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as `the Tribunal'). In view of the aforesaid stand taken by the revenue, all these cases are dismissed as no referable substantial question of law is arising out of the impugned order passed by the Tribunal. (SATISH KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE

March 03, 2008 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) vkg JUDGE

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →