COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III vs. LUDHIANA CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LTD
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court held that the present appeal filed by the revenue had been rendered infructuous. This conclusion was based on the submission by the revenue's counsel that the order under challenge, dated February 25, 2014, had been recalled by the Tribunal. Additionally, the assessee's appeal against the same order had been withdrawn, and the Tribunal was to hear the matter afresh on merits. Consequently, the High Court ordered that the appeal be disposed of as infructuous, without delving into the merits of the original assessment or the Tribunal's order. No specific issues were decided on their merits, and no operative directions for remand or deletion were issued.
What were the facts?
The appeal by the Commissioner of Income Tax-III, Ludhiana (appellant-revenue) challenges an order dated February 25, 2014, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench 'A' (the Tribunal). This order pertains to the Assessment Year 2009-10 and concerns The Ludhiana Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. (respondent-assessee). The revenue's counsel stated that the order of February 25, 2014, has since been recalled. Furthermore, an appeal filed by the assessee challenging the same order has been withdrawn. The Tribunal is scheduled to hear the appeal afresh on its merits.
What were the issues?
The High Court was not required to decide any substantive issues of law or fact. The primary procedural development was the recall of the Tribunal's order dated February 25, 2014. The revenue's counsel submitted that due to this recall and the subsequent withdrawal of the assessee's appeal against the recalled order, the present appeal filed by the revenue has become infructuous. The revenue argued that the appeal should be disposed of as infructuous, as the underlying order is no longer extant and the matter is to be heard afresh by the Tribunal. No specific arguments were recorded for the assessee in relation to the merits of the original dispute.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No. 347 of 2014 Decided on : 30.03.2016 The Commissioner of Income Tax-III, Ludhiana . . . Appellant Versus The Ludhiana Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. . . . Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE RAJ RAHUL GARG PRESENT: Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Advocate for the appellant-revenue. Mr. Saurabh Goel, Advocate for the respondent-assessee. **** AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (Oral) Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that the challenge in the present appeal is to the order dated 25th February, 2014, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench 'A', Chandigarh (for brevity 'the Tribunal') in ITA No. 526/CHD/2013, relating to the Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. Mr. Rajesh Katoch, learned counsel for the revenue states that since the order dated 25th February, 2014 has been recalled and the appeal bearing ITA No. 427 of 2015 filed by the respondent-assessee challenging the same has also been withdrawn vide separate order of even date and the appeal is to be heard by the Tribunal on merits afresh, therefore, the present appeal has been rendered infructuous and may be disposed of as such. 3. Ordered accordingly. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE (RAJ RAHUL GARG) March 30, 2016 JUDGE J.Ram
JAWALA RAM 2016.04.04 10:46 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- J.M.Swamy vs. Government Of INDIAKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026
- S. Nithyananda vs. State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026
- Ritik vs. State Of M.P.Madhya Pradesh · 16 Oct 2026
- Venkadeswara Grill Works vs. The Joint Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026
- Mufti Clothing And Co vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026
