GEE CITY BUILDERS P. LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
ITA/419/2019HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01104884201911 March 2022Bench: MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH,MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh held that the present appeal is infructuous. This decision was based on the statement made by the learned counsel for the appellant that the matter had been settled with the respondent authorities and the appellant no longer wished to pursue the appeal. Consequently, the appeal was disposed of as infructuous. No other issues were decided on merits, and no specific operative directions were issued beyond disposing of the appeal.

What were the facts?

The appellant, Gee City Builders P. Ltd., filed an appeal before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh against the Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Ludhiana and another. The appeal was filed against an order or action that is not specified in the provided text. The procedural history leading to this appeal is also not detailed. The appeal was listed for decision on March 11, 2022.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the present appeal is infructuous in light of the settlement between the appellant and the respondent authorities? (Question of fact) Assessee's Contention: The learned counsel for the appellant stated that the matter has been settled by the appellant with the respondent authorities and therefore, the appellant does not wish to pursue the present appeal. Revenue's Contention: No specific contention is recorded for the revenue in the provided text.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

114 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

ITA-419-2019

Date of decision : 11.03.2022 Gee City Builders P. Ltd.

.....Appellant Versus Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Ludhiana and another ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL Present: Mr. Rajesh Sethi, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Senior Standing counsel with Mr. Jaswinder Singh Sandhu, Junior Standing counsel for the respondents. AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH

, J. (ORAL)

Learned counsel for the appellant states that the matter has been settled by the appellant with the respondents authorities and therefore, he does not want to pursue the present appeal. In the light of the above, the present appeal is disposed of as infructuous.

(AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH)

JUDGE March 11th, 2022 (SANDEEP MOUDGIL) ps-I

JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes No Whether Reportable : Yes No POOJA SHARMA 2022.03.12 11:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →