ANJANA KUMARI vs. COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX-I, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, RISHI NAGAR, LUDHIANA AND OTHERS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/23117/2023HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01126730202305 November 2024Author: MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH1 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal noted that the respondent-Income Tax Department had stated that the relief had been granted to the petitioner and the Writ Petition had become infructuous. The learned counsel for the petitioner did not object to this statement. Therefore, in view of the aforesaid, the Tribunal held that the Writ Petition had become infructuous and accordingly dismissed it. All pending applications were also disposed of as a consequence. No specific issues regarding the merits of the case were decided as the petition was disposed of on procedural grounds.

What were the facts?

The case involves a Writ Petition filed by Ess Kay Mari against the Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Ludhiana, and others. The petitioner was represented by Mr. Iqbal Roshan, Advocate, and the respondent-Income Tax Department was represented by Mr. S.K. Mukhi, Advocate, and Mr. Ranvijay Singh, Senior Standing Counsel. The Income Tax Department stated that the relief has been granted to the petitioner and the Writ Petition has been rendered infructuous. The petitioner's counsel did not object to this statement. Consequently, the Writ Petition was deemed to have become infructuous and was dismissed. All pending applications were also disposed of accordingly.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Writ Petition has become infructuous, requiring dismissal? (Question of fact) Assessee's Contention: The petitioner's counsel did not object to the statement made by the respondent-Income Tax Department that the relief has been granted and the Writ Petition has become infructuous. Revenue's Contention: The respondent-Income Tax Department stated that the relief has been granted to the petitioner and the Writ Petition has been rendered infructuous.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

251 IN TH ANJANA KUM

COMMISSIO NAGAR, LUD

CORAM: H

H

Present: M

M

M f

* SANJEEV PR

1.

L stated that the has been rend

2.

L statement m Department.

3.

I infructuous an 4. A

November 5, Ess Kay

Whether speak Whether Repor HE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA CHANDIGAR

CWP-2 Date of MARI

V ONER OF INCOME TAX-1, DHIANA AND OTHERS HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJ Mr. Iqbal Roshan, Advocate for Mr. S.K. Mukhi, Advocate for th Mr. Ranvijay Singh, Senior Stand for the respondent-Income Tax D ***** RAKASH SHARMA, J. (Oral) Learned counsel for the responde e relief has been granted to the dered infructuous. Learned counsel for the petitio made by learned counsel for In view of the aforesaid, the pr nd the same is accordingly dismi All pending applications also stan [SANJEEV , 2024

[SAN

king / reasoned :

Y rtable

:

Y AB AND HARYANA AT RH 23117-2023 (O&M) f Decision:05.11.2024

..…...Petitioner(s) V/s. AAYAKAR BHAWAN, RISHI …......Respondent(s) NJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA NJAY VASHISTH he petitioner. ding Counsel, Department. ent-Income Tax Department has petitioner and the Writ Petition oner does not object the said the respondent-Income Tax esent Writ Petition has become issed. nd disposed of accordingly.

V PRAKASH SHARMA] JUDGE

NJAY VASHISTH] JUDGE Yes / No Yes / No I ) s n d x e Suresh Kumar 2024.11.06 10:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →