PUNJAB URBAN PLANNING & DEV. AUTHORITY vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** 201

ITA-599-2006 Date of Decision: 14.01.2026 PUNJAB URBAN PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

...Appellant Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I

…Respondent And

Sr. No. Case No. Appellant Respondent 2. ITA-345-2011 (O&M) Geater Ludhiana Area Development Authority Commissioner of Income Tax-III

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL

Present:- Mr. Rohit Jain, Advocate (Through V.C.),

Mr. Aniket Aggarwal, Advocate, Mr. Abhishek Sharma for

Mr. Vishal Gupta, Advocate for the appellant

Mr. B.M. Monga, Advocate and Mr. Rohit Kaura, Advocate for the appellant (in ITA-427-2014)

Mr. Shantanu Bansal, Advocate for the appellant (in ITA-345-2011)

Ms. Pridhi Sandhu, Advocate

for respondent-Income Tax

*** DEEPAK BISSYAN 2026.01.15 10:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

ITA-599-2006 and connected cases

-2-

JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL)

Learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that in view of judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court in “ACIT(E) Vs. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority”, (2022) 449 ITR 1 (SC) and “CIT Vs. Gujarat Maritime Board”, (2007) 295 ITR 561 (SC), the impugned orders may be set aside and matter be remanded to Commissioner (Exemption) to pass fresh order. 2.

In the wake of statement of both sides, the petitions stand disposed of with a direction to Commissioner (Exemption) to pass fresh order in the light of afore-cited judgments. 3.

The assessee at the first instance will appear before Commissioner (Exemption) on 28.01.2026 at 11:00AM along with requisite documents and thereafter as directed by said authority. 4.

Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.

(JAGMOHAN BANSAL)

JUDGE

(AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL)

JUDGE January 14, 2026 Deepak DPA

Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No

Whether Reportable

Yes/No DEEPAK BISSYAN 2026.01.15 10:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document