PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -2 CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MOBISOFT TELESOLUTIONS PVT LTD PLOT NO.2,IT PARK SEC-22 PANCHKULA

PDF · subscribers
ITA/494/2017HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01117715201722 February 2018Bench: MR. JUSTICE S.J. VAZIFDAR,MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN1 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the result of this appeal would be the same as the result in ITA No. 434 of 2015, which was disposed of by a separate order and judgment passed on the same day. For the reasons stated in that other judgment, this appeal was also disposed of in the same terms. The specific findings, reasoning, and ratio decidendi from the other judgment are not provided in this excerpt. Therefore, the operative directions and any issues left undecided are not ascertainable from this text. The judgment does not specify any relief granted or denied, nor does it mention any specific sections of the Income Tax Act that were discussed.

What were the facts?

This is an appeal filed by the Pr. Commissioner of Income-Tax 2, Chandigarh (the Revenue) against M/s Mobisoft Telesolutions Private Limited (the Assessee). The appeal concerns assessment year(s) not specified in the judgment. The specific order or action under challenge is also not detailed. The High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh, comprising Chief Justice S.J. Vazifdar and Justice Avneesh Jhingan, heard the matter. The judgment states that the result of this appeal will follow the result of another appeal, ITA No. 434 of 2015, which was disposed of by a separate order and judgment passed on the same day. The amount in dispute is not mentioned.

What were the issues?

The High Court was not required to decide any specific issues in this appeal as it was disposed of based on the outcome of a related appeal. The judgment explicitly states that the result in this appeal will follow the result in ITA No. 434 of 2015. Therefore, the issues that were decided in ITA No. 434 of 2015 would implicitly govern the outcome here. The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by either the Assessee or the Revenue in this particular appeal, other than their agreement that the outcome would be dependent on the other case.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH INCOME TAX APPEAL No.494 of 2017 (O&M) DATE OF DECISION: 22.02.2018 Pr. Commissioner of Income-Tax 2, Chandigarh …..Petitioner versus M/s Mobisoft Telesolutions Private Limited .....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.J. VAZIFDAR, CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN Present: Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Advocate for the appellant Ms. Radhika Suri, Senior Advocate with Mr. Manpreet Singh Kanda, Advocate for the respondent .. S.J. VAZIFDAR, CHIEF JUSTICE: (Oral) It is agreed that the result in this appeal will follow the result in ITA No.434 of 2015 titled as Pr. Commissioner of Income-Tax-2, Chandigarh vs. M/s Mobisoft Tele Solutions P. Ltd. which we disposed of by a separate order and judgment passed today. For the reasons stated therein, this appeal is also disposed of in the same terms. (S.J. VAZIFDAR) CHIEF JUSTICE (AVNEESH JHINGAN) JUDGE 22.02.2018 parkash NOTE: Whether speaking/non-speaking: Speaking Whether reportable: YES/NO Parkash Chand 2018.02.27 14:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →