PUNJAB AGRO INDIA CORPORATION LIMITED vs. D.C.I.T. CHANDIGARH
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court noted that the present appeal was concluded by its earlier judgment in ITA No. 170 of 2017. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal before the High Court against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The assessee's counsel conceded that the matter was concluded by a previous judgment of the High Court in a similar case involving the same parties.
What were the issues?
Whether the ITAT order was illegal and liable to be set aside, and whether the Tribunal failed to apply a relevant judgment to the facts of the case.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
1 ITA-249-2019 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 101-3 ITA-249-2019 (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 appellant. *** AJAY TEWARI, J. (Oral) 1. This appeal has been filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order dated 15.11.2018 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh in ITA No. 1448/CHD/2016 for the assessment year 2011-12 received on 7.12.2018, 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 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.” ANURADHA 2020.02.05 17:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
2 ITA-249-2019 (O&M) 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 17:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
More judgments on Section 260-A
- Rijwan vs Income Tax OfficerITA/3/202023 Sept 2026
- Manoj Gupta vs Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)…ITA/243/202618 Sept 2026
- Rajesh Kumar Gupta vs Income Tax Officer, JammuITA/20/20142 Apr 2026
- Late Shri Gopaliyengar Madabushi Muralidhar vs The Income Tax OfficerITA/16/202526 Feb 2026
- Shri K. Samba Siva Rao ( HUF), Hyd vs I.T.O., HydITTA/181/20109 Feb 2026
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Biswanath Rana vs. The Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Sushama Mishra vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Saudamini Samantray vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Bhubaneswar IiOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Keshav Rice Mill, Ganjam vs. Chief Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, KatakaOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Nanda Contruction PVT. LTD., Angul vs. Additional Commissioner, GST And Central Excise Commissionerate, SundergarhOrissa · 28 Oct 2026