THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2 CHANDIGARH vs. M/S KOTLA HYDRO POWER PVT LTD #2587 PHASE - XI,MOHALI
What did the High Court hold?
The Tribunal noted that the learned counsel for the applicant/respondent (assessee) stated that the disputed tax liability has already been discharged in terms of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Viswas Scheme, 2020, and nothing survives in the case. In light of this submission, the learned counsel for the appellant (revenue) wished to withdraw the instant appeal. The Tribunal, therefore, dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. No specific findings on the merits of the original dispute were made, as the appeal was withdrawn by the revenue.
What were the facts?
The case involves an appeal filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Chandigarh (the appellant/revenue) against M/s. Kotla Hydro Power Pvt. Ltd. (the respondent/assessee). The appeal pertains to ITA-393-2017. During the proceedings, the learned counsel for the respondent/assessee stated that the disputed tax liability has been discharged under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Viswas Scheme, 2020, rendering the case infructuous. Consequently, the appellant/revenue sought to withdraw the appeal.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the appeal has become infructuous due to the settlement of the disputed tax liability under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Viswas Scheme, 2020. (Question of fact) Assessee's contention: The disputed tax liability has been discharged under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Viswas Scheme, 2020, and nothing survives in the case. No specific authorities or precedents were cited. Revenue's contention: The learned counsel for the appellant/revenue wished to withdraw the instant appeal.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
2023:PHHC:050952-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 241 CM-9333-CII-2022 in/and ITA-393-2017 (O&M) Date of Decision: 12.04.2023 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Chandigarh ..... Appellant Versus M/s. Kotla Hydro Power Pvt. Ltd. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present: Mr. Abhinav Narang, Advocate for the applicant/respondent. Ms. Gauri Neo Rampal, Sr. Standing counsel for the Income-Tax/non-applicant-appellant. RITU BAHRI,
CM-9333-CII-2022
Learned counsel for the applicant/respondent states that the disputed Tax liability has already been discharged in terms of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Viswas Scheme, 2020 and nothing survives in this case. In view of the above, the instant application is allowed. The main appeal is taken up on board today itself. ITA-393-2017 In the light of the aforementioned, learned counsel for the appellant wishes to withdraw the instant appeal. Dismissed as withdrawn. (RITU BAHRI) JUDGE
(MANISHA BATRA)
JUDGE 12.04.2023
Satyawan 1. Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No 2. Whether reportable: Yes/No SATYAWAN 2023.04.17 09:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Abdhish Dhal Samanta, Bhubaneswar vs. Chief Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Kniit Net Industries Private Limited, Khurda vs. Superintendent Of CGST And Central Excise, Bhubaneswar Ii CircleOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Swarnapai Chemicals (Opc) Private Limited, Cuttack vs. Sales Tax Officer, Cuttack IOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S. Middlex, Puri vs. Commnr. Of State Tax, Banijyakar Bhawan, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Sunadei Indane Gramin Vitrak, Nayagarh vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, Cuttack, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
