Case LawHigh Court › Bar Council Of Punjab & Haryana v. Incom...

Bar Council Of Punjab & Haryana v. Income Tax Officer (Tds-2), Chandigarh & Another

High Court 21 Mar 2016 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · phhc
Parties
Bar Council Of Punjab & Haryana v. Income Tax Officer (Tds-2), Chandigarh & Another
Date of order
21 Mar 2016
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Allowed

Case summary

In Bar Council Of Punjab & Haryana v. Income Tax Officer (Tds-2), Chandigarh & Another, the High Court (2016) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

The order — as passed by the High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 5313 of 2016Decided on : 21.03.2016 Bar Council of Punjab & Haryana Versus Income Tax Officer (TDS-2), Chandigarh & another . . . Petitioner . . . Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTALHON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE RAJ RAHUL GARG PRESENT: Mr. K.L. Goyal, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Sandeep Goyal, Advocatefor the petitioner. **** AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (Oral) The prayer made in this writ petition filed under Articles226/227 of the Constitution of India, inter alia for quashing of AnnexureP-2, dated 4[th] May, 2014, whereby, a demand of ` 57,760/- has beenrequired to be deposited by the petitioner.2.After arguing for sometime, it was submitted by the learnedcounsel for the petitioner that he may be allowed to withdraw the presentwrit petition with liberty to the petitioner to approach respondent No.1 byfiling a detailed and comprehensive representation raising all the pleas ashave been sought to be raised in the present writ petition. Further, a prayerwas made to issue a time bound direction to respondent No.1 to decide therepresentation expeditiously, in accordance with law. 3.Dismissed as withdrawn. However, liberty is granted to thepetitioner to file a detailed and comprehensive representation raising all the CWP No. 5313 of 2016 case such a representation is filed by the petitioner, the same shall bedecided by respondent No.1, within next one month from the date of itsreceipt by passing speaking order after affording an opportunity of hearingto the petitioner, in accordance with law. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE March 21, 2016 J.Ram (RAJ RAHUL GARG) JUDGE
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ Get help with an income-tax notice → 💬 Ask our CA
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation. Full disclaimer & Terms.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan