Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
204 I
M/s Eastman
Commissione
CORAM: H
Present: M M
SANJEEV P 1.
L 94, the asses assessee and appeal was w the Assessing 2.
H with respect based on its order has be Assessing Of be directed to 3.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUN AT CHANDIGA I D Industries
Vs. er of Income Tax
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SAN HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SAN Mr. Sunil K. Mukhi, Advocate w Mr. Iqbal Roshan, Advocate for t Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Sr. Standin
***
RAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) Learned counsel for the appellan ssee had preferred an appeal w thereafter ITA-156-2002, was f withdrawn by the assessee as dur g Officer allowed the claim of the He submits that the present app to AY: 1992-93. The ITAT h earlier order with respect to AY ecome infructuous on account fficer for the AY: 1993-94. He p take a fresh decision relating to Counsel for the revenue does not NJAB AND HARYANA ARH ITA-157-2002 (O&M) Date of Decision: 11.11.2024
…Appellant
…Respondent NJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA NJAY VASHISTH with the appellant. ng Counsel for the revenue. ) nt submits that for the AY: 1993- which was decided against the filed before this Court. The said ring the pendency of the appeal, e appellant. peal is against the ITAT order had passed the impugned order Y: 1993-94 as of now the said of allowing the claim by the prays that the Assessing Officer AY: 1992-93 also. t object the same.
- e d , r r d e r RAJESH KUMAR 2024.11.13 16:49 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.
ITA-157-2002 (O&M)
[2]
We accordingly direct the Assessing Officer to consider and pass orders in the light of his earlier order passed in relation to AY: 1993-94 in the present case too. The appeal stands disposed of accordingly. 5.
All pending misc. application(s) also stand disposed of.
(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE
(SANJAY VASHISTH)
JUDGE 11.11.2024 rajesh 1. Whether speaking/reasoned? : Yes/No 2. Whether reportable?
: Yes/No RAJESH KUMAR 2024.11.13 16:49 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.