M/S PUNJAB INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES, JALANDHAR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHANDIGARH AND ANR

PDF · subscribers
ITA/33/2022HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01008865202204 December 2024Bench: MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The appeal is allowed. The judgment states that the appeal is allowed for reasons to be seen in a detailed judgment passed in ITA No. 271 of 2014, which involves the same assessee and revenue. Since the detailed reasoning is not provided in this excerpt, the specific findings on the issues of whether the order was speaking/reasoned or reportable, and the ratio decidendi, cannot be determined from this text. The operative direction is that the appeal is allowed, implying relief for the assessee. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The assessee, M/s Punjab Institute of Medical Sciences, Jalandhar, filed an appeal before the ITAT. The appeal challenges an order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax and another authority. The specific assessment year(s) are not explicitly mentioned in this excerpt. The procedural history indicates that the matter was reserved on 20.11.2024 and pronounced on 04.12.2024. The High Court of Punjab and Haryana is hearing this appeal, which is numbered ITA No. 33 of 2022 (O&M). The appeal is being heard along with ITA No. 271 of 2014, which also pertains to M/s Punjab Institute of Medical Sciences, Jalandhar, versus the Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the speaking/reasoned order is valid? (Question of law) 2. Whether the reportable order is valid? (Question of law) Assessee's Contentions: The assessee, represented by Mr. Alok Mittal and Mr. Shantanu Bansal, Advocates, has not had their specific arguments recorded in this excerpt. However, their presence and representation indicate they are contesting the order under challenge. Revenue's Contentions: The Revenue, represented by Mr. Varun Issar, Senior Standing Counsel, has not had their specific arguments recorded in this excerpt. However, their presence and representation indicate they are defending the order under challenge.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN T

M/s Punjab I Commissione

CORAM: H

Present:

SANJEEV P

even date pas Sciences, Jal another.

04.12.2024 VS

Whether spea Whether repo THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJ AT CHANDIGA

ITA

Reserved on Pronounced o

Institute of Medical Sciences, Jal Versus er of Income Tax, Jalandhar and

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SAN HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SAN Mr. Alok Mittal, Advocate and Mr. Shantanu Bansal, Advocate

Mr. Varun Issar, Senior Standin PRAKASH SHARMA, J. The appeal is allowed. For rea ssed in ITA No. 271 of 2014 – M landhar Versus Commissioner

(SANJ

aking/reasoned

ortable

JAB AND HARYANA ARH No. 33 of 2022 (O&M)

: 20.11.2024 on : 04.12.2024

landhar … Appellant d another …Respondents NJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA NJAY VASHISTH , for the Assessee. g Counsel, for the Revenue. asons, see detailed judgment of M/s Punjab Institute of Medical of Income Tax, Jalandhar and JEEV PRAKASH SHARMA)

JUDGE (SANJAY VASHISTH)

JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No f l d VARINDER SINGH 2024.12.05 14:32 I attest to the accuracy and authencity of this order/judgment

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →