Case Law › High Court › Cmapl/478/2016 Of Principal Commnr.of In...

Cmapl/478/2016 Of Principal Commnr.of Income Tax,Cuttack v. Pradeep Ku.bhut

High Court 20 Nov 2019 In favour of: Revenue

Forum / Bench

High Court · cisnc

Parties

Date of order

20 Nov 2019

Assessment year(s)

—

Outcome

Allowed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Cmapl/478/2016 Of Principal Commnr.of Income Tax,Cuttack v. Pradeep Ku.bhut, the High Court (2019) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

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

02. 20.11.2019 MP Heard learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department-petitioner. This application has been filed for restoration of I.T.A. No.69 of 2005, which was dismissed vide order dated 08.08.2016 for non-compliance of peremptory order dated 29.01.2014. Learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department states that the issue involved in the appeal i.e. I.T.A. No.69 of 2005 is covered by the Circular No.17/2019, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, dated 08.08.2019 and, therefore, the restoration application may be allowed and the main appeal may be disposed of in terms of the aforesaid Circular. Only on the basis of such submission made, the application for restoration is allowed by condoning the delay in filing the restoration application. I.T.A. No.69 of 2005 is restored to its original file. CMAPL is accordingly disposed of. .…….......……………… ( K.S. Jhaveri ) Chief Justice …………………..……… (K. R. Mohapatra) Judge

Facing a similar income-tax issue?

Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.

✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 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.