AGILENT TECHNOLOGIES (INTERNATIONAL) PVT LTD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND OTHERS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/20473/2022HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01097756202214 September 2023Bench: MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI,MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted that the petitioner's counsel had stated that the entire refund amount had been paid, and therefore, nothing further survived in the petition. Consequently, the Court found no necessity to issue any further directions. The petition was disposed of on this basis, without delving into the merits of any substantive tax dispute.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Agilent Technologies (International) Pvt. Limited, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. The respondents were the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax and others. The petition concerned an issue related to income tax. During the proceedings, the learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the entire amount of refund due to the petitioner has been paid. Consequently, nothing further survives in the petition.

What were the issues?

The High Court was to decide whether any further directions were required in the writ petition. The petitioner's counsel stated that the entire refund amount had been paid, implying no further action was needed from the court. The revenue's contentions are not recorded in the judgment.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cited by 24 judgments on BharatTax

See all citing judgments →

Counted from the text of the judgments hosted here. Most recent first.

2023:PHHC:121144-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CWP No.20473 of 2022 (O&M)

Date of decision: 14.09.2023 Agilent Technologies (International) Pvt. Limited .....Petitioner Versus Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax and others .....Respondents CORAM:HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present: Mr. Rohit Chandel, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Senior Standing Counsel, for the respondents. *** Ritu Bahri, J. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the entire amount of refund has been paid to the petitioner. Now, nothing survives in this petition. In view of the said fact, no further directions are required to be given in this petition. Disposed of accordingly. (RITU BAHRI)

JUDGE 14.09.2023

(MANISHA BATRA) ajp JUDGE

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No AJAY PRASHER 2023.09.15 10:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →