MANAK ENGINEERS P.LTD vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX.

PDF · subscribers
CWP/17260/1994HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01012226199422 August 2013Author: MR. JUSTICE DR. BHARAT BHUSHAN PARSOON,MR. JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the writ petition was infructuous. The court noted that the revenue's reply indicated that the impugned order was appealable. Furthermore, proceedings were pending before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal concerning the earlier order that was rectified. The court reasoned that if the appeal pending before the Tribunal had already been decided, the present writ petition would be rendered infructuous. Therefore, the court disposed of the writ petition as infructuous. The petitioner was granted liberty to file an appeal if the appeal pending before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal had not yet been decided. No specific finding was given on the merits of the Section 154 order or the withdrawal of Section 80-I relief.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Munak Engineers Private Limited, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated September 29, 1994, passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Chandigarh. This order, passed under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, amended a prior order dated April 8, 1992, relating to Assessment Year 1989-90. The amendment involved withdrawing relief previously granted under Section 80-I of the Act. The revenue's reply indicated that the impugned order was appealable and that proceedings were pending before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal concerning the earlier order which was subsequently rectified.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the writ petition is maintainable when an appealable order has been passed and proceedings were pending before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal? (Question of law and fact, concerning the availability of alternative remedies and the procedural status of the case). The petitioner argued that they were challenging the order passed under Section 154. The revenue contended that the impugned order was appealable and that the writ petition was rendered infructuous because proceedings were already pending before the Tribunal regarding the earlier order, which was subsequently rectified. The revenue did not rely on any specific authorities or precedents in this regard.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 154,Section 80-I

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: August 22, 2013. Munak Engineers Private Limited .....Petitioner Versus The Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DR. BHARAT BHUSHAN PARSOON Present: Mr. Alok Mittal, Advocate for the petitioner. RAJIVE BHALLA, J. (Oral) The petitioner has filed the instant writ petition challenging order dated 29.09.1994, passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Chandigarh, passed under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) relating to Assessment Year 1989-90 amending order dated 8.04.1992 thereby withdrawing relief which was allowed under Section 80-I of the said Act. A perusal of the reply filed by the revenue reveals that the impugned order is appealable and even otherwise, proceedings were pending before the Tribunal in relation to the earlier order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Chandigarh, which was rectified subsequently. The appeal must have already Manoj Kumar 2013.08.31 12:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document been decided, thereby rendering the present petition infructuous. In this view of the matter we dispose of the writ petition as infructuous with liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal in case

the appeal which was pending before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has not been decided. Disposed of as infructuous, with the aforestated liberty. (RAJIVE BHALLA) JUDGE (DR. BHARAT BHUSHAN PARSOON) 22.08.2013 JUDGE Manoj Bhutani Manoj Kumar 2013.08.31 12:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

More judgments on Section 154

All 8,676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →