Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central-1 v. Neena Wadhwa
High Court
26 Jul 2016 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · dhcdb
Parties
Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central-1 v. Neena Wadhwa
Date of order
26 Jul 2016
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central-1 v. Neena Wadhwa, the High Court (2016) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: The appeal is accordingly dismissed.
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 DELHI AT NEW DELHI
R.10
+ ITA 83/2004
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL-1)
..... Appellant
Through: Mr. P. Roy Chaudhary, Senior Standing counsel & Ms.Vibhooti Malhotra, Advocate.
versus
NEENA WADHWA
..... Respondent
Through: Mr.C.S. Aggarwal, Senior Advocate With Mr. Prakash Kumar, Advocate.
CORAM:
JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI O R D E R% 26.07.2016
1. The question framed by this Court on 24[th] March 2008 in this appeal against the order dated 20[th] January 2003 passed by the ITAT in IT(SS) Appeal No. 100/Del/2002 for the block period from 1[st] April 1988 to 11[th]February 1999 reads as under:
“Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the Block Assessment order passed under Section 158BC of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 29th May, 2001 is barred by limitation in terms of the provisions of Section 158BE of the Income Tax Act, 1961.”
2. It is not in dispute that the said question stands answered in favour of the Assessee and against the Revenue by the decision of this Court dated 30[th]November 2015 in ITA No. 27 of 2015 (CIT v.J.H. Finvest Pvt.Ltd.).
ITA 83/2004 Page 1 of 2
3. The question is answered in the affirmative i.e. in favour of the Assessee and against the revenue. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.
S.MURALIDHAR, J
JULY 26, 2016 mg
NAJMI WAZIRI, J
ITA 83/2004 Page 2 of 2
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.