GREATER MOHALI AREA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II AND ANOTHER

PDF · subscribers
CWP/25625/2017HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01095299201722 November 2017Author: MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL,MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the Civil Miscellaneous Application (CMA) No. 16767 of 2017, thereby permitting the applicant-petitioner, Greater Mohali Area Development Authority (GMADA), to withdraw the main writ petition (CWP No. 25625 of 2017). The reasoning was based on the oral request of the learned counsel for the applicant-petitioner, supported by an affidavit, stating that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) had already decided the appeal and the order was received on November 09, 2017. Furthermore, the matter was assailed before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, with an application for stay filed there. In view of the order passed in the CMA, the writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn. The High Court did not delve into the merits of the original writ petition.

What were the facts?

The Greater Mohali Area Development Authority (GMADA), Mohali, filed a Civil Writ Petition (CWP) No. 25625 of 2017 before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. GMADA also filed Civil Misc. No. 16767 of 2017, an application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, seeking to withdraw the main writ petition. The reason cited for withdrawal was that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) had decided the appeal on November 09, 2017. This order was subsequently assailed before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Chandigarh Bench, where an application for stay had been filed. The High Court heard the application for withdrawal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the applicant-petitioner (GMADA) should be permitted to withdraw the writ petition, given that the appeal has been decided by the CIT(A) and the matter is now before the ITAT. Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the writ petition should be withdrawn because the appellate authority (CIT(A)) had passed an order, and the matter was further being pursued before the ITAT, including filing an application for stay. This indicated a procedural development that rendered the writ petition infructuous or superseded. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the revenue in relation to the application for withdrawal. The court proceeded to decide the application based on the submissions made by the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 151

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cited by 8 judgments on BharatTax

See all citing judgments →

Counted from the text of the judgments hosted here. Most recent first.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 107 Civil Misc. No.16767 of 2017 in/and Civil Writ Petition No.25625 of 2017 Date of decision: November 22, 2017 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority, Mohali ....Applicant-petitioner versus Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Chandigarh and another ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL ***** Present: Ms. Radhika Suri, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Manpreet Singh Kanda, Advocate for the applicant-petitioner. ****** AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J.

(Oral)

Civil Misc. No.16767 of 2017 This is an application filed under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, seeking withdrawal of the main writ petition on the ground that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), has decided

the appeal and the order has been received on November 09, 2017, which has been assailed before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench and an application for stay has been filed there. Sonia Kinra 2017.11.28 13:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP No.25625 of 2017(O&M) -2- ------ After hearing learned counsel for the applicant-petitioner and perusing the contents made in the application, which is supported by an affidavit of Sh. Akash Goyal, Additional Chief Administrator, Greater Mohali Area Development Authority, Mohali, the Civil Miscellaneous Application is hereby allowed and the applicant-petitioner is permitted to withdraw the writ petition. CM stands disposed of. CWP No.25625 of 2017 At the oral request of learned counsel for the petitioner, the date fixed in the main writ petition i.e. 17.01.2018 is proponed for today. In view of the order of even date passed in Civil Misc. No.16767 of 2017, the present writ petition stands dismissed as withdrawn. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE (AMIT RAWAL) November 22, 2017 JUDGE sonia gugnani Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No Whether reportable? Yes/No Sonia Kinra 2017.11.28 13:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

More judgments on Section 151

All 4,323 judgments and leading authorities on Section 151 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →