Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central, Calcutta v. M/S Somany Pilkington's Ltd
High Court
20 Jan 2020 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · phhc
Parties
Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central, Calcutta v. M/S Somany Pilkington's Ltd
Date of order
20 Jan 2020
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central, Calcutta v. M/S Somany Pilkington's Ltd, the High Court (2020) 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.
363IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA.AT CHANDIGARH
Date of decision : 20.01.2020ITR No.171 of 1996 (O&M)
M/s Somany Pilkington's Ltd.
...... Applicant
VeTSuU
Commissioner of Income Tax, Central, Calcutta...... Respondent
ITR No.172 of 1996 (O&M)
M/s Somany Pilkington's Ltd.
...... Applicant
VeTSuU
Commissioner of Income Tax, Central, Calcutta...... Respondent
ITR No.173 of 1996 (O&M)
Commissioner of Income Tax, Central, Calcutta...... Applicant
Versus
M/s Somany Pilkington's Ltd....... Respondent
ITR No.174 of 1996 (O&M)
Commissioner of Income Tax, Central, Calcutta...... Applicant
Versus
M/s Somany Pilkington's Ltd.
...... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARTHON'BLE MR. JUSTICAVNEESH JHINGAN
000
Present :Mr. Anchit Sharma, Advocate for the applicant(in ITR No.171 and 172 of 1996).
Mr. Vaibhav Gupta, Advocatefor Income Tax Department-respondent
(in ITR No.171 and 172 of 1996)for the applicant in ITR No.173 and 174 of 1996)
AJAY TEWARI, J. (Oral)
ITR No.171 and 172 of 1996
Counsel tor the applicant prays for permission to withdraw
these references.
Allowed as prayed for,
Dismissed as withdrawn.
ITR No.173 and 174 of 1996
Learned counsel for the applicant-revenue states that sincethe tax effect involved is less than the monetary limit as prescribed inCircular No.3 of 2018 dated 11.07.2018 issued by the Central Board ofDirect Taxes, further amended vide Circular No.l7 of 2019 datedO08 O8.2019 read with Letter No.BF.No.279/Misc/M-93/2018-ITJ dated20.08.2019, he has instructions to withdraw the present appeal. However,he prayed that liberty be granted to the appellant-revenue to file anapplication for revival of the appeal, in case something survives therein.
Counsel for the respondent is not in a position to deny this
fact.
Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for.
Since the main cases have been dismissed as withdrawn, thepending Civil Miscellaneous Applications, if any, also stand disposed off,
(AJAY TEWARI )JUDGE
!"!#" ! !pooja sharma-l
Whether speaking/reasonedWhether Reportable :
( AVNEESH JHINGAN)JUDGE
Yes/NoYes/No
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.