PUNJAB STATE POWER CORPORATION LTD vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX PATIALA AND ANOTHER

PDF · subscribers
CWP/22453/2022HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01109255202220 March 2024Bench: MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA1 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the writ petition had become infructuous. The reasoning was based on the submission made by the petitioner's counsel, which was not objected to by the Revenue's counsel. The principle derived is that if a party to a writ petition demonstrates that the relief sought has become unattainable or unnecessary due to subsequent developments, and the opposing party does not contest this, the court will typically dispose of the petition as infructuous. The operative direction was to dismiss the writ petition as having become infructuous. All interim orders stood vacated, and all pending applications were disposed of accordingly. No issues were expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd., filed a writ petition before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. The respondents were the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala, and another. The writ petition was filed challenging an order or action by the revenue. The procedural history indicates that the matter proceeded to the High Court. Subsequently, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the writ petition had become infructuous due to subsequent orders passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The learned counsel for the Revenue did not object to this submission.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the writ petition has become infructuous in light of subsequent orders passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)? (Question of fact) Assessee's Contention: The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the writ petition has become infructuous. The petitioner relied on subsequent orders passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to support this submission. Revenue's Contention: The learned counsel for the Revenue appeared and did not object to the petitioner's submission that the writ petition had become infructuous.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

274-1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 2024:PHHC:039983-DB CWP-22453-2022 (O&M) Date of Decision: 20.03.2024 Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. . . . . Petitioner Vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala and another . . . . Respondents **** CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA

HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA **** Present Mr. Abhinav Narang, Advocate

for the petitioner.

Mr. Amanpreet (A.P.) Singh, Sr. Standing Counsel

for the respondents/Revenue. **** SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral)

1.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present writ petition has been rendered infructuous in view of the subsequent orders passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals). 2. Learned counsel for the Revenue appears and does not object to the same. 3. In view thereof, writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. 4. All interim orders stand vacated. 5. All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly.

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE

(SUDEEPTI SHARMA) JUDGE March 20, 2024 Mohit goyal 1. Whether speaking/reasoned?

Yes/No 2. Whether reportable?

Yes/No

MOHIT GOYAL 2024.03.21 11:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →