FREEMAN MEASURES LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
ITA/109/2003HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01049275200322 July 2024Bench: MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH1 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution. This decision was based on the submission by the learned counsel for the appellant that they had no instructions from the appellant. The Court reasoned that without instructions, the appeal could not be proceeded with on its merits. Therefore, the appeal was disposed of on this procedural ground. The ratio decidendi is that an appeal cannot be prosecuted if the counsel lacks instructions from the party. The operative direction was the dismissal of the appeal and the disposal of all pending miscellaneous applications.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by Freeman Measures Ltd. against the Commissioner of Income Tax. The assessment year(s) are not specified. The order or action under challenge is not detailed, but it is an appeal before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana. The procedural history indicates that the counsel for the appellant submitted that they have no instructions from the appellant. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution. All pending miscellaneous applications were also disposed of.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed for non-prosecution, given that the appellant's counsel has no instructions. This is a procedural issue concerning the conduct of the appeal. Assessee's Contention: The assessee's counsel stated they have no instructions from the appellant, which is the basis for the dismissal. Revenue's Contention: The revenue's counsel, Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Sr. Standing Counsel, was present, but no specific arguments are recorded in the judgment regarding the merits of the appeal or the dismissal for non-prosecution.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

213 (1) Freeman Mea

Commissione

CORAM: H

Present M

M M

SANJEEV P 1.

L instructions fr 2.

I prosecution. 3.

22.07.2024 rajesh

1 2 IN THE HIGH COURT O AT CHANDIGA I D asures Ltd.

Vs. er of Income Tax

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SAN HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SAN Mr. Divya Suri, Advocate for the Mr. Varun Issar, Advocate for Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Sr. Standin ***

RAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) Learned counsel for the petiti rom the appellant. In view thereof, the present All pending misc. application(s)

(SANJ

1.

Whether speaking/reasoned? 2. Whether reportable?

OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA ARH ITA-109-2003 (O&M) Date of Decision: 22.07.2024

…Appellant

…Respondent NJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA NJAY VASHISTH e appellant. ng Counsel for the respondent.

) ioner submits that he has no appeal is dismissed for non- also stand disposed of. JEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE : Yes/No : Yes/No

o - RAJESH KUMAR 2024.07.23 14:05 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 →