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

PDF · subscribers
ITA/32/2013HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01105186201314 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 has already been settled under the 'Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme'. Consequently, the Department stated that it would not be pursuing the appeal. The Court, therefore, disposed of the appeal as not pressed, based on the statement made by the counsel for both parties. No specific finding on any substantive issue of law or fact was made, as the appeal was withdrawn from consideration on merits.

What were the facts?

This is an appeal filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Chandigarh (the Revenue) against M/s Glaxo SmithKline Consumer Healthcare Ltd. (the assessee). The appeal pertains to the assessment year(s) which are not explicitly stated in the judgment. The order or action under challenge is also not detailed. The procedural history indicates that the dispute has been settled under the 'Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme'. The High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh is hearing the appeal.

What were the issues?

The Tribunal had to decide whether the appeal filed by the Revenue should be pursued. The Revenue contended that the dispute has been settled under the 'Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme' and therefore, they would not be pursuing the appeal. The assessee's contentions are not recorded in the judgment. No specific legal or factual questions are framed as issues for determination by the Tribunal.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Neutral Citation No. 2023:PHHC:161579 -DB

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

ITA-32-2013 (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 →