PUNJAB AGRO INDIA CORPORATION LIMITED vs. D.C.I.T. CIRCLE 4(1), CHANDIGARH

PDF · subscribers
ITA/235/2019HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01035619201921 January 2020Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI,MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court condoned the delay in filing the appeal. However, based on the concession of the counsel, the appeal was dismissed as it was concluded by a prior judgment.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an ITAT order for AY 2005-06. The appeal was filed with a significant delay. The assessee's counsel conceded that the matter was concluded by a previous judgment in a similar case involving the same parties.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal filed with a delay should be admitted and whether the present appeal is concluded by a previous judgment of the High Court.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

CM-11977-CII-2019 in/and 1 ITA-235-2019 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 101-2 CM-11977-CII-2019 in/and ITA-235-2019 (O&M) Date of Decision : 21.1.2020 M/s Punjab Agro Ind. Corp. Ltd. ...... Appellant Versus D.C.I.T, Circle 4 (1) Chandigarh ...... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN *** Present : Mr. Maninder Arora, Advocate for the applicant-appellant. *** AJAY TEWARI, J. (Oral) CM-11977-CII-2019 This is an application for condonation of delay of 212 days delay in filing the appeal. For the reasons recorded in the application, the same is allowed and delay of 212 days in filing the appeal is condoned. ITA-235-2019 1. This appeal has been filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order dated 5.4.2018 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh in ITA No. 05/CHD/2009 for the assessment year 2005-06 received on 3.5.2018, claiming the following questions of law :- “i. Whether under the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Lower authorities and ITAT have not committed ANURADHA 2020.02.05 17:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CM-11977-CII-2019 in/and 2 ITA-235-2019 (O&M) illegality by passing the impugned orders ? ii. Whether under the facts and in the circumstances of the case the impugned order are not liable to be set aside ? iii. Whether under the facts and in the circumstances of the case the tribunal has not committed an illegality by not applying the judgment as referred above to the facts of present case.” 2. At the very outset learned counsel very fairly states that the matter has been concluded against the assessee in view of the judgment passed in ITA No. 170 of 2017 dated 6.11.2017 titled as M/s Punjab Agro Ind. Corp. Ltd. vs. D.C.I.T, Circle 4 (1), Chandigarh. 3. Consequently, the present appeal stands dismissed in terms of the decision of ITA No. 170-2017 4. Since the main case has been decided, the pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.

(AJAY TEWARI)

JUDGE (AVNEESH JHINGAN) JUDGE 21.1.2020 anuradha

Whether speaking/reasoned - Yes/No Whether reportable - Yes/No ANURADHA 2020.02.05 17:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

More judgments on Section 260-A

All 2,570 judgments and leading authorities on Section 260-A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →