PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PANCHKULA vs. M/S HARYANA STATE COOPERATIVE APEX BANK LIMITED
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court disposed of the appeal as not pressed. The Court noted that the Assessee had availed of the Vivad-se-Vishwas Act. Consequently, the counsel for the appellant (Revenue) stated they had instructions not to pursue the appeal. The operative direction was to dispose of the appeal as not pressed. Importantly, the Court explicitly left the question of law raised in the appeal open, meaning no decision was made on the merits of the legal issue. Any pending applications were also disposed of.
What were the facts?
The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula (the Revenue) filed an appeal before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh against an order concerning M/s Haryana State Cooperative Apex Bank Limited (the Assessee). The appeal was filed against an order that is not specified in the judgment. The assessment year(s) are also not mentioned. The procedural history indicates that the appeal was filed by the Revenue.
What were the issues?
The judgment does not explicitly state the questions of law that the High Court was to decide. However, the appeal was filed by the Revenue. The Revenue's counsel made a statement that the Assessee had availed of the Vivad-se-Vishwas Act amnesty scheme after the appeal was filed. Based on this development, the Revenue's counsel submitted that they had instructions not to pursue the appeal. The Assessee's contentions are not recorded in the judgment.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-10-2021 (O&M) Date of Decision:29.07.2022 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula .......Appellant Versus M/s Haryana State Cooperative Apex Bank Limited ......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN Present:- Mr. Yogesh Putney, Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant. ***** TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA J.(Oral) Mr. Yogesh Putney, Sr. Standing Counsel for the appellant makes a statement at the bar that after filing of the instant appeal, the Assessee- respondent has availed of amnesty scheme Vivad-se-Vishwas Act. In view of such circumstances/development counsel for the appellant submits that he has instructions not to pursue the instant appeal. Disposed of as not pressed. However, the question of law raised in the appeal is left open. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA)
JUDGE (PANKAJ JAIN)
JUDGE 29.07.2022 shweta
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No SHWETA 2022.08.01 18:12 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sh Umang Uniyal vs. Commissioner Department Of Central Goods And Services TaxUttarakhand · 16 Oct 2026
- Shivaraj M S vs. The Union Of INDIAKarnataka · 15 Oct 2026
- Paresh Textiles Prop Paresh Gudhka vs. Superintendent Range Iv Div VBombay · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Palladium Constructions PVT LTD. vs. Principal Commissioner Of Central TaxKarnataka · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Vk Construction vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - IiMadras · 15 Oct 2026
