NAIM CHAND JAIN vs. ASSTT.COMMR.OF INCOME TAX ETC.
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court noted the statement made by the counsel for the revenue that the petitioner-assessee has not initiated any further proceedings against the order passed by the ITAT on March 26, 2009. In view of this statement, the Court was satisfied that the litigation pending in the present appeal had become infructuous. Consequently, the appeal was disposed of as infructuous. The Court granted liberty to the petitioner to seek revival of the appeal in case of any existing grievance. No specific finding was given on the merits of the ITAT's orders, as the case was decided on procedural grounds.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, Naim Chand Jain, is challenging an order passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) had previously dismissed the assessee's appeal on July 29, 1998, confirming the order of the CIT (Appeals). The assessee then filed an Income Tax Reference (ITR) No. 203 of 1999 before the High Court, which was returned on November 13, 2006, without answering the posed question. The ITAT reiterated its earlier order on March 26, 2009. The revenue's counsel stated that the assessee has not initiated any further proceedings against the ITAT's order dated March 26, 2009.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal's order dated March 26, 2009, reiterating its earlier order dated July 29, 1998, is valid and binding. The revenue contended that the assessee has not initiated any further proceedings against the ITAT's order dated March 26, 2009. The judgment does not record any specific arguments from the assessee's side regarding the validity or binding nature of the ITAT's orders. The core of the matter is the finality of the ITAT's decision and the lack of subsequent legal challenge by the assessee.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: July 11, 2013. Naim Chand Jain ... Petitioner v. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar and others ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DR. BHARAT BHUSHAN PARSOON Present: None for the petitioner. Shri Vivek Sethi, Advocate for the respondent. Rajive Bhalla
, J. (Oral): Counsel for the revenue states, on instructions from Shri Vinod Kaushish, Nodal Officer, appointed by the Income Tax Department, for pursuing the income tax cases in the High Court, that after decision of ITR No.4 of 1996 on 27.8.1997, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal confirmed the order passed by the CIT (Appeals) and dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee on 29.7.1998. The assessee thereafter filed ITR No.203 of 1999 before this Court which was returned on 13.11.2006 without answering the question posed. Vide order dated 26.3.2009, ITAT reiterated its order dated 29.7.1998. It is further submitted on instructions, that the petitioner assessee has not initiated any further proceedings against the order passed by the ITAT on 26.3.2009. In view of the statement made by counsel for the revenue, we are satisfied that the lis pending in the present appeal has become infructuous and is, therefore, disposed of accordingly, with liberty to the petitioner to seek revival in case of any existing grievance.
[ Rajive Bhalla ]
Judge
[Dr. Bharat Bhushan Parsoon] July 11, 2013. Judge kadyan
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- S. Nithyananda vs. State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026
- Ritik vs. State Of M.P.Madhya Pradesh · 16 Oct 2026
- Venkadeswara Grill Works vs. The Joint Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026
- Mufti Clothing And Co vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026
- U Days Garments vs. The Adjudication OfficerMadras · 16 Oct 2026
