COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX II CHANDIGARH vs. M/S GLAXO SMITHKLINE CONSUMER HEALTHCARE LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA/30/2013HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01105164201314 December 2023Bench: MR. JUSTICE GURMEET SINGH SANDHAWALIA,MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted that the dispute in the present appeal had been settled under the 'Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme'. Consequently, the Department agreed not to pursue the appeal. The Court was informed by the counsel for both parties that the appeal was not being pressed. Therefore, the High Court disposed of the appeal as not pressed. No finding was given on the merits of the case, and no specific ratio decidendi can be extracted for future citation. The operative direction was to dispose of the appeal as not pressed.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Chandigarh (appellant/revenue) against M/s Glaxo SmithKline Consumer Healthcare Ltd. (respondent/assessee). The specific assessment year(s) and the order or action under challenge are not detailed in the provided text. The procedural history indicates that the dispute has been settled under the 'Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme'. The parties have agreed that the Department will not pursue the appeal. The hearing date was preponed, and the appeal was disposed of as not pressed.

What were the issues?

The Tribunal did not have to decide any substantive issues as the appeal was settled under the 'Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme'. The core of the matter was the agreement between the parties to withdraw the appeal. The assessee's contentions are not recorded as the appeal was not pressed. The revenue's contention was that the appeal should be disposed of as not pressed due to the settlement under the 'Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme'. No specific provisions of the Income Tax Act were debated as the appeal was withdrawn before merits were considered.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Neutral Citation No. 2023:PHHC:161441 -DB

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

ITA-30-2013 (O&M)

Decided on : 14.12.2023

Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Chandigarh

……Appellant(s)

Versus M/s Glaxo SmithKline Consumer Healthcare Ltd. ……Respondent(s)

CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.S. SANDHAWALIA

HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI

Present:- Ms.Pridhi Jaswinder Sandhu, Jr.Standing Counsel, for the appellant(s).

Mr.Vishal Gupta, Advocate

Mr.Abhishek Sharma, Advocate for the respondent(s).

****

G.S. Sandhawalia, J. (Oral) 1.

It is agreed that the dispute in the present appeal already stands settled under the ‘Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme’ and therefore, the Department would not be pursuing the said appeal. 2.

Accordingly, date of hearing of the case from 12.03.2024 is preponed to today. The same is disposed of as not pressed, as per the statement made by counsel for the parties.

(G.S. SANDHAWALIA)

JUDGE

(LAPITA BANERJI) 14.12.2023

JUDGE sailesh

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes

Whether Reportable :

NAVEEN NAGPAL 2023.12.19 11:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Chandigarh

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →